Month: July 2016

Master Yongseong was born in Namwon, North Jeolla-do Province. He began studying the Chinese classics at the age of six, and by the age of eight he could even write poetry, exhibiting exemplary literary skill. At the age of thirteen, he had a dream that he had received a dharma transmission from the Buddha, and then some time later when by chance he came upon some monastery, he discovered that the enshrined Buddha there looked exactly like the Buddha he had seen in his dream. After that incident, he stayed at the monastery wanting to live there, but his parents persuaded him to return home. At the age of fifteen, he ordained at Geungnagam Hermitage at Haeinsa Monastery on Mt. Gayasan.

Following his ordination, he learned the practice of Buddha recitation from Master Suwol and as he was continuing with his memorization of the daebiju (the dharani of Gwanseeum Bodhisattva), he had an awakening experience after six days of deep Seon meditation practice at the Dosoram Hermitage at Bogwangsa Monastery in Yangju. However, feeling himself that this awakening was insufficient, he continued further by taking on the investigation of the “MU” hwadu. Finally, in 1884, at the age of twenty, he broke through his mass of doubt and awakened to the fact that emptiness and form were not two. Following this, during a period of intense practice he again had a great awakening while reading the Jeondeungnok (The Record of the Transmission of the Lamp) in the Samiram Hermitage at Songgwangsa Monastery.

After this great awakening, the Master went to Sangseonam Hermitage in Mt. Jirisan where he practiced both Seon and Gyo (doctrinal study) with voracity, teaching Seon meditation to other monks and also reading various sutras, including the Awakening of Mahayana Faith, the Lotus Sutra, and the Flower Adornment Sutra. In addition, while cultivating the perfection of effort (virya paramita), he engaged in discourse on the nature of truth with masters such as Hyewol, Mangong and others, gradually expanding his own awakening. Regardless of where he went, his presence made it as if a Seon assembly was being held and the spirit of Seon flourished.

In 1907, at the age of 43, the Master headed for China. To a Chinese monk who arrogantly praised the superiority of Chinese Buddhism and disparaged Korean Buddhism, he replied, “Is the Sun and the Moon in the sky your country’s alone? Buddhist dharma is a public truth of the world, so how can the public truth of the world be limited to China?” In this way, he defended the legitimacy of Korean Buddhism.

In 1910, he was invited to the position of Head Master of Chilburam Meditation Hall (Seonwon) in Mt. Jirisan, guiding and encouraging many monastics. He composed the first work that analyzed and criticized the teachings of Christianity from a Korean Buddhist perspective, Gwiwon Jeongjong (Correct Teachings Returning to the Origin). As a response to the growing strength of Christianity in Korea, which was more organized and successful in its outreach efforts, he set out on an effort to write books systematizing Buddhist doctrines and tenets, as well as translating sutras written in Classical Chinese into Korean native script (hangeul).

In 1911, he went to Seoul for the propagation of urban Buddhism. The following year, he established a Seon Center in Daesa-dong to lead a modernized propagation movement, and then later, he founded Daegaksa Temple in Seoul’s Bongik-dong where he offered Buddhist instruction to the general public.

In 1919, during the March 1st Independence Movement against the Japanese colonial regime, together with Master Manhae, he served as a representative of the Buddhist community among the 33 national representatives, devoting themselves to the work of restoring the nation and serving as an encouragement to all Buddhists to join in the patriotic movement. As a result, he was apprehended by the Japanese police, put on trial, and endured three years of hardship in prison. Even after his release, he was put under constant surveillance by the Japanese authorities. During his three year confinement, upon seeing that another prisoner had a Bible that had been translated into the Korean script, he came to again recognize the necessity of translating the Buddhist scriptures into vernacular Korean. Thus, after his release from prison, he formed the “Tripitaka Translation Group” (Samjang Yeokhoe) and immersed himself in the work of translation, for the purpose of propagating Buddhism to the public. In addition, while serving as Head Master of the 10,000 days Meditation Hall (Manil Seonwon) at Naewonsa Monastery in Yangsan, he translated the 80 volumes of the Flower Garland Sutra, an effort regarded as an epoch-making accomplishment in the Korean translation of the Buddhist sutras.

In 1925, at the age of 61, he established the “Supreme Enlightenment Foundation” (Daegakgyo) at Daegaksa in Seoul, beginning new Buddhist and Public Education movements. A movement to arouse self-awareness in each of his fellow countrymen that they are truthful beings who possess infinite possibilities and wisdom, this activity was grounded in the idea of putting into practice the Mahayana Bodhisattva path of serving others and serving one’s self.

Following this, he went to Longjing in Manchuria where he cleared the land in the Mt. Baegunsan to both manage the Hwagwawon, where he established a “Supreme Enlightenment Foundation”, and spread the “Seon and Agriculture, Combined” (seonnong ilchi) movement. As a means of bringing about the economic independence of Buddhist temples, this movement especially emphasized agricultural cultivation and development alongside Seon meditation; the Master personally grabbed a hoe to join in the labor. In addition, to concentrate the activity of Buddhist propagation, together with Master Hanyeong he published the “Buddha Day” (Buril) magazine and inaugurated the practice of holding Buddhist services every Sunday. Furthermore, they brought about the complete translation and standardization of Buddhist rituals and recitations into vernacular Korean, and authored the “Chanbulga,” a series of odes to the virtues of the Buddha that could be sung in Korean.

Living with an unmatched intensity during these difficult times, Master Yongseong left to us a diversity of lifetime achievements, including his defense of traditional Buddhism, his reform and popularization of Buddhism, the simultaneous practice of Seon and Vinaya, the implementation of the Agricultural Seon movement, as well as the idea of “Supreme Enlightenment” and the advocacy of “Supreme Enlightenment Foundation” movements. Finally in 1940, at the age of 76, after 61 years in the sangha, he entered Nirvana. Among his disciples were Masters Dongsan Hyeil, Goam, Jaun, Deongheon, Gobong and others.

Writings

The Master’s written work includes twenty-one volumes, including the Gwiwon Jeongjong (Correct Teachings Returning to the Origin), Gakhae Illyun (The Sea of Enlightenment and the Circle of the Sun), Seonmun Yoji (Essential Teachings of Seon Buddhism), and others. He also produced a 22 volume work of translations and commentaries including the Suneungeomgyeong Seonhan Yeonui (Commentaries on the Suramgama-sutra in Korean) and his published essays which amounted to nine volumes, including Manil chamseon gyeolsahoe changnipgi (The Story of Establishing the 10,000 Days Seon Community), Hwalgu chamseon manil gyeolsa barwonmun (Dedication for the 10,000 Days Live Phrase Seon Meditation), Beomgye saenghwal-e daehan geonbaekseo (Admonition for the Keeping of the Precepts), and others.

Doctrinal Distinction

To bring about the popularization and reform of Buddhism, Master Yongseong strove endlessly to find and implement the dynamic path of Buddhism, embodied in the idea of daegak “supreme enlightenment.”

Because the thinking of daegak as emphasized by Master Yongseong was advocated through the idea of jagak gakta, that the self-awakening to one’s fundamental nature and the awakening of others are not two separate things, the combined notions of awakening to bongak (original enlightenment), sigak (initial enlightenment), and gugyeonggak (ultimate enlightenment) comprised the idea referred to as daegak (supreme enlightenment). Based on self-enlightenment (gak), it can be said that “Buddha” is nothing other than daegak and “Buddhism” is nothing other than the “teaching of daegak.”

Master Yongeong’s thinking of daegak was an individualized and powerful Buddhist teaching that matched the spiritual capability rooted within each sentient being who lived and breathed just as he. His method was similar to treating patients with medicines that suit their disease, or how the Buddha always modified his dharma sermons to communicate the truth in accordance with the interpretive capabilities of his audience.

The epochal circumstances of Japanese colonization that brought an end to the Joseon Dynasty perhaps cut more deeply into the heart of Master Yongseong than anyone else, and he strove to make the 2500 year-old teachings of the Buddha relevant to the long-suffering Korean people, struggling under the Japanese colonial regime. As a result, he abandoned the life of “Buddhism in the mountains,” presenting for the first time an alternate model propagating Buddhism within an urban setting. Moreover, he perceived the obstacles for the public to approach Buddhism, due to the fact that ordinary Buddhist believers faced great difficulties in understanding the Buddhist sutras written in classical Chinese, he also began the immense undertaking of translating the sutras into Korean script (hangeul). The result of this undertaking was that numerous sutras were written in the vernacular, including the Diamond Sutra, the Flower Garland Sutra and others, and in this way he supplied a shortcut by which the public could more easily come into contact with the wisdom of Buddhism. This translation project was not his only propagation effort, as he also introduced the modern method of setting the framework for Buddhism’s economic independence through the establishment and management of urban propagation groups.

In addition, within his practice, he gave weight to both the Vinaya and the practice methods of the “observing the hwadu” (Ganhwa) Method of Seon meditation, and through setting an example of exhaustive practice, he showed a path of guidance to those who sought the dharma.

Even under the sharp gleaming edge of the Japanese blade, poised as it was to annihilate Korean national culture, the unyielding strength of the Master, who always stood at the forefront of efforts to propagate of Buddhism to the public, was a result of the power of his practice and activities that literally put his life at stake. As a monk who had already transcended the boundaries of life and death, he was able to overcome each and every fear without hesitation.

Gyeongheo and Mangong, his disciple, were returning to their temple in the evening after getting some rice for their food. Especially that day, they got rice full of sack. Apart from their satisfaction, the sacks were heavy and it was still distant to their destination. Mangong felt tired and got pain on the shoulder, so it was very difficult to follow his master. Noticing this, Gyeongheo said, “I will use one method to get fast. Please see.” They were passing a certain village. Then, a beautiful young woman was coming from the opposit side of them with a water jar on the head. She was apparently a bride just over 20 years old. When Gyeongheo faced her, he held her both ears and kissed her lips. The woman screamed, dropped and broke the jar, and ran back into her house. A distubance arose. Villagers ran out of their houses with sticks or clubs and shouted, “Wicked monks, stop there.” The two monks began to run away. They ran so desperately that villagers couldn’t follow them to the last. After a while, when they took a rest, Gyeongheo said, “Was the sack heavy?” Mangong said, “Regardlessly, I don’t know how I could run so long way with it.” Gyeongheo said, “Don’t I have talent?” They laughed together looking at each other.

Gyeongheo and Mangong, his disciple, were returning to their temple in the evening after getting some rice for their food. Especially that day, they got rice full of sack. Apart from their satisfaction, the sacks were heavy and it was still distant to their destination. Mangong felt tired and got pain on the shoulder, so it was very difficult to follow his master. Noticing this, Gyeongheo said, “I will use one method to get fast. Please see.” They were passing a certain village. Then, a beautiful young woman was coming from the opposit side of them with a water jar on the head. She was apparently a bride just over 20 years old. When Gyeongheo faced her, he held her both ears and kissed her lips. The woman screamed, dropped and broke the jar, and ran back into her house. A distubance arose. Villagers ran out of their houses with sticks or clubs and shouted, “Wicked monks, stop there.” The two monks began to run away. They ran so desperately that villagers couldn’t follow them to the last. After a while, when they took a rest, Gyeongheo said, “Was the sack heavy?” Mangong said, “Regardlessly, I don’t know how I could run so long way with it.” Gyeongheo said, “Don’t I have talent?” They laughed together looking at each other.

2] A Preach for Mother

One day, Gyeongheo gathered people to preach for the sake of his mother and told his student to fetch her. His mother was very glad, so she dressed herself with new clothes and paid her respects to him, and took a seat. Thereupon, Gyeongheo took off his own clothes piece by piece until he became all naked. He said, “Mother, please look at me.” His mother waiting for a great preach was very surprised, got angry and said, “How can you preach like this ? How outrageous !” She returned to her room right away and locked the door of her room. Then, he smiled bitterly and said, “How can she be my mother ? When I was a child, she took off my clothes, washed my body, hugged and kissed me. Why can’t she do that now ? How pitiful are those worldly customs !” His students had to beg her parden saying that it had been a great and special preach.

3] A Leper

Master Gyeongheo was dwelling at Cunggyesa temple, when a leper woman knocked at the door of his room.He noticed that she had wandered lacking in love. He allowed her to enter his room. Since then, he shared his mattress together with her for a week, until his disciple Mangong said, “I notice your Dharma is supreme, but we can’t endure it. Please have her get out of here.” Gyeongheo said, “You seem to have many boundaries catching you. Then I can’t help it.” So he had to tell her to leave.

Contestations over Korean Buddhist Identities

The “Introduction” to the Gyeongheo-jip

Gregory Nicholas Evon

This article partly derives from research contained in a Ph.D. dissertation (Evon 1999), and it represents a re-articulation of certain basic points made therein. Here, the fundamental point I seek to make is simply this: there exists an inherent conflict between the assumptions that a self-conscious Korean Buddhist identity can be founded on the singular notion of purity, or celibacy, and that this singular notion of identity, in turn, reasonably can be judged to be nationalistic or patriotic in the context of the Japanese colonial period (1910-1945). Such a general notion of identity, I would argue, at once elides the contestation over identity among Korean Buddhists themselves during the colonial period and ultimately conflates religious for national identities. Further, such elision and conflation seem to be products of post-liberation discourse. Throughout this paper I will use the expression post-liberation in order to allow for a distinction suggested elsewhere: that post-colonialism ought to refer to all that follows the “beginning of colonial contact” (Ashcroft, Griffiths, Tiffin 1999: 2). In that sense, however, post-colonialism is inaccurate to the extent that it allows for little distinction between the colonial period and its aftermath.
Such a distinction is, in part, what this paper seeks to address?hence my employment of post-liberation. In this connection, it should be admitted that this paper makes some general claims in regard to post-liberation Korean Buddhist discourse without always staking these claims to definite examples. Yet as with all generalizations, these claims are not necessarily applicable to the entirety of specific cases, or to be exact, the entirety of the work of all scholars. On the other hand, at least this shortcoming can be explained partly in reference to Whitehead’s dictum that much
can be learned about an era through what it assumes rather than expresses. By the very definition of assumption, we are forced to deal with frameworks of inquiry in which ideas are embedded, or assumed. These frameworks and implicit ideas limit the questions asked and the answers given, thus demanding an “unearthing of silences” which requires “a project linked to an interpretation” so we may locate “the retrospective significance of hitherto neglected events” (Trouillot 1995: 58).1 In this paper, the neglected events to be addressed are those surrounding the publication of a Korean Buddhist text in the colonial period, and the silences are those of post-liberation scholarship on these events. This paper, then, is an interpretation.

Master Gyeong-Heo is esteemed as a great revivalist of contemporary Korean Seon following on from Seon Master Hu-jeong Cheong-Heo (1520-1604).

1. Biography

Master Gyeongheo lived during a particularly violent, agitated period of the country, when the Joseon Dynasty was collapsing and Japanese colonization was just starting. He was born as the second son of his parents at Jadong-ri, Jeonju in 1846 C.E. He lost his father at an early age, and then his mother went to live with him at Cheonggyesa Temple when he was 8 years old; there he began to live as a monk under Venerable Gyeheo. When he was 13 years old, he first learned Chinese characters from a Confucian scholar who was staying at the temple. Learning came easily to him and he was praised as a brilliant boy. In the winter of the same year, Venerable Gyeheo recognized Gyeongheo’s ability and so sent the boy to study under a famous lecturer, Manhwa, in Donghaksa Temple. Gyeongheo learned and studied not only Buddhist sutras but also the Confucian and Taoist texts. When he was 22 years, he was appointed to the post of lecturer and taught the students at the Buddhist academy of Donghaksa Temple.

When he was 33 years old, there was a major change in his life. On the way Seoul to see his previous teacher, Gyeheo, who had given up his robes and returned to secular life, a heavy storm came up. In desperation, he went from door to door in the hope of finding shelter from the rain. At each house he was rejected as the families were afraid he would bring the raging epidemic to their house. Unable to find shelter, he was forced to spend the whole night under a big tree outside the village. He struggled with fear and with death. At that moment, he suddenly realized that the truth that the principle of life and death in his heart and so actually realized are the facts that he had only known intellectually until then. Then, he said, “Even though I am totally ignorant, I must be free of words. As I search through the teachings of the great masters, I will go beyond this world.” And he made a resolution in this pious and serious state of mind. The next day he returned to Donghaksa Temple, and then and there decided to no longer teach his students. He shut the door of his room and devoted himself to investigating his hwadu. After three months of diligent practice, he attained enlightenment on hearing the question of a novice, “ A cow has no nostrils? What does that mean?”

In spring of the next year, he moved to Cheonjangam Hermitage in Mt. Yeonamsan, and continued the practice which succeeds enlightenment. He said he was continuing the lineage of Yongam who was a successor of the Cheongheo and Hwanseong. At the age of 34, he recited his Nirvana poem.

“ I heard about the cow with no nostrils,

And suddenly the whole universe is my home.

Mt. Yeonamsan in June lies flat under the road.

A farmer, at the end of his work, is singing.”

For the next 20 years, from that time on, he founded many Seon training monasteries not only at Cheonjangam and Sudeoksa Temple, but also Beomeosa and Haeinsa in Gyeongsang-do Province, Songgwangsa and Hwaeomsa in Jeolla-do Province. He developed and spread the Seon tradition nationwide by teaching many Seon monks. He especially influenced the disciples of masters Mangong Wolmyeon, Hyewol, Suwol, Hanam and other Seon monks who have been instrumental in developing contemporary Buddhist history. These masters and monks, who succeeded the Seon tradition and lineage, made the foundation of the Jogye Order which is the center of Korean Buddhism today.

Master Gyeongheo suddenly disappeared from public view and the Buddhist world in 1905 C.E. when he was 59 years old. Up until then he had been involved in many projects, delivering a lot of dharma talks and attending many assemblies as a dharma teacher and an observer. He took to wearing secular clothes and he let his hair grow. He wandered around Ganggye in Pyeongan-do and Gapsan in Hamgyeong-do, and taught illiterate children. His disciples said that when he was 66 years old, on April 25th, 1912, he entered into final Nirvana. The following poem is his last hymn before his death.

“Light from the moon of clear mind

Drinks up everything in the world

When the mind and the light both disappear,

What is this?”

2. Writings

The existing writings of Master Gyeongheo were compiled by his disciples rather than written personally by him. In 1942, thirty years after his death, his disciple Mangong collected the late Gyeongheo’s materials and published a book, A Collection of Gyeongheo. This included such chapters as “Master’s Dharma Talks,” “Preface,” “Records,” “Letters,” “Activities,” “Poems,” “songs,” and his disciple “Hanam’s Activities,” and “A Short Lineage” written by Manhae Han Yong-un. The dharma talks encompass his main ideas and include “The Weeping of a Muddy Ox,” and “ How to Live as a Monk.” “The Song” emphasized the way of Seon practice and aspects of spreading Buddhism to the public while “The Preface” and “The Record” included the aims and major characteristics of The Retreat Community of Samadhi (meditation)and Prajna (wisdom).

In 1981, The Dharma Talks of Master Gyeongheo was published and this book included new material which had never been published before. For instance, “Hymns of Mt. Geumgangsan Travels,” “The 40 Verses of Seon,” “The “Biography of Master Gyeongheo written by Master Hanam,” “Thirty-eight Amusing Anecdotes of Master Gyeongheo” were added to the this edition.

Seonmun chwaryo ( The Essential Sayings of the Seon House), a collection of the Seon Masters’ sayings and studies in China and Korea compiled by Master Gyeongheo in early 1900 C.E., is well known as a text of Seon.

3. Characteristics of His Thoughts

Master Gyeongheo showed himself as a mirror of Seon practice as he made special efforts to improve the Seon tradition through the foundation of a retreat community and the re-opening of many closed Seon monasteries. He was 53 years old when he founded the retreat community was in 1899 C.E. The community succeeded the tradition of The Retreat Community of Samadhi and Praijna of Master Bojo during Goryeo. The aim of the retreat community was the attainment of enlightenment. The main characteristic of this retreat community was to have a realistic view of liberation, with the vow of rebirth in the Trayastrimsa heaven (the heaven of the thirty-three gods). This is not for people who can attain enlightenment by themselves, but for the poor and the suffering whose only hope is through faith and vow.

In late Joseon, when Master Gyeongheo lived, the Seon tradition of the Seon Order which had been established in the late Silla period, was almost non-existent and practitioners were hard to come by. It was due to the retreat community of Master Gyeongheo that the Seon tradition was revived.

He continuously taught Seon, yet he was not limited to Seon practice; he openly enjoined the practices of chanting and mantra recitation and considered them as equally beneficial. In particular, he insisted on the unification of the Seon and Doctrinal approaches.

His thought was reflected in his other writings, “Song of the Ox Herd” and “Verses of the Ox Herd.” In these works he explains how the innate Buddha Nature is discovered and developed by using the symbolism of the ox. His view was different from those of other ox herd pictures popularized at that time, he didn’t even stick to the schematic pictures, nor even the number of ten scenes. He emphasized the innate place of Self Nature rather than simply showing the stages of evolution of the black ox into a white ox. In the final stage of the series, he would teach, “The ox herder, carrying his bag and ringing a hand bell, returns to the village; this is the final stage of an accomplished man.” This statement underlines the importance of drawing compassion into worldly life, thus benefiting all human beings and all other beings as well.

Master Gyeongheo was a reformer of Seon who made Seon practical and popular; he is revered as one of the great pioneers of Seon in showing the ultimate stage of enlightenment. He always extolled the virtues of Seon not only in his dharma talks but also in his dialogues and encounters of Seon questions and answers. His unusual behavior and written message were expedient means for spreading the teachings of Seon.

Ever since Seon was introduced to Korea, there was a drive to prove the superiority of Seon over Kyo throughout the Korean Buddhist world, especially in the late Goryeo Dynasty.

After the seventh century CE, when Seon had taken root in China and was well established, various disputes arose within the Seon School. These arguments began with the difference of opinion between Master Huineng of Southern Seon and Master Shenxiu of Northern Seon. Then the conflict between the Mahayana Seon claimed by the Northern Order and Seon of the Tathagata (Kor. Yeorae Seon) of the Southern Order became prominent in the Seon world. That is, Master Heze Shenhui claimed that the Seon of the Tathagata is superior to Mahayana Seon, and the former is named so, for it is equal to the Tathagata.

But the newly established Hongzhou Order of Master Mazu’s lineage criticized Master Shenhui, calling him a master of mere intellectual understanding, one who searches for meaning and rea­son. And the Hongzhou Order developed an independent Seon pur­port, which investigates the Dharma transmitted by Master Bodhidharma This is the Seon of the patriarchs (Kor. Josa Seon), and this Seon was claimed as being superior to and surpassing the Seon of the Tathagata.

This claim is based on the idea that Seon is superior to Kyo. The realization of Seon as being “a direct transmission, outside the texts, not relying on words and letters, direct transmission from mind to mind, seeing into one’s nature and attaining Buddhahood” is not achieved through texts but through a transmission from mind to mind. Here, the awakening of the Tathagata is the center in the Seon of the Tathagata, but what is more important is the Seon purport of the patriarchs in the Seon of the patriarchs. This pur­port of Seon later even influenced academic lecturers who studied Kyo, so that these Kyo scholars who did not have any Seon prac­tice emphasized the superiority of Seon.

In Korea, the main dispute was started by scholarly monks who lived in the southern and southwestern areas of the peninsula of Korea. They published personal records on various theories of Buddhism in 18th century and from this the disputes arose in the Seon families during the reigns of King Jeongjo (r. 1777-1800), King Soonjo (r. 1801-1834), King Heonjong (r. 1835-1849), King Cheoljong (r. 1850-1863) and King Gojong (r. 1864-1907).

The leading roles were taken by Master Baekpa Geungseon (1767-1852), Master Choui Uiseon (1786-1856), lay scholar Chusa (1786-1856), Master Udam Honggi (1822-1881), Master Seoldu Yuhyeong (1822-1881), Master Chugwon Jinha (1861-1926) and lay scholar Jeong Dasan (1762-1836), each one partic­ipating more or less directly. Beginning with Master Baekpa’s Hand Glass of Seon Literature (Kor. Seonmun-sugyong), the monks took up and started arguing about Seon. Let us investigate the main point of their argument.

Master Baekpa wrote Hand Glass of Seon Literature in order to lay out a standard by which to discriminate the relative superi­ority of the various forms of Seon. The book considers three phrases of Master Linji’s teaching as the standard, depending foe its source mainly on Records of Linji. In addition there are other ref­erences such as Master Chiso’s Insight of Man and Heaven (Kor. Incheon-anmok), Master Hwanseong Jian’s Essentials of Five Or­ders of Seon (Kor. Seonmun-ojong-kangyo), Master Cheonchaek’s Precious Storehouse of Seon (Kor. Seonmun-bojang-nok), and Essentials of Seon (Kor. Seonmun-kangyo).

Before we examine whether the Seon thesis revealed in Hand Glass of Seon is a correct way of looking at things or not, it is important to first understand the general idea of the book.

The book reveals that all Seon can be originally discriminated into three kinds, that is, Seon of the patriarchs, Seon of the Tathagata, and Seon of meaning and reason (Kor. Uiri Seon), a theory derived from the Seon teachings of the three phrases of Linji. Mas­ter Baekpa evaluates and analyses the phrases, coming to the con­clusion that the first phrase is the Seon of the patriarchs, the sec­ond phrase is the Seon of the Tathagata, and the third is the Seon of meaning and reason.

1) The “Three Phrases of Master Linji” is the Standard of Seon

Master Baekpa goes on to argue that this correct view of the three phrases solves all problems of searching for standards of Seon. The first phrase is the phrase before host and guest are divided and it is achieved when a practitioner has insight into the true void and sublime existence. Such a practitioner has a high faculty, and becomes a master of Buddhas and patriarchs, when attaining the first phrase. It is a stage of Seon of the patriarchs.

The second phrase is such in which confrontation is ceased and which removes any clue of argument. It is to reach the “three mysterious gates” of Linji, and they are the mystery in the word, the mystery in the function, and the mystery in the mystery. The first signifies the essence of language, the second the final use of language, the third the place where no language is to be found. The third phrase started from theory, but there is no language found in the end, hence the final mystery is analyzed by Master Baekpa to be that of the true stage.

The background of the true stage of the mystery is a place of truth where there is no foolishness. The three mysteries show that the way of Son starts from language and reaches the stage which cannot be expressed by language.

The third phrase is bound by form and conception. It signifies dealing with expedient means. To borrow the expression of Re­cords of Linji, it is “giving speech to arahats when they meet arahats, and to hungry ghosts when they meet hungry ghosts.” This describes the stage of teaching sentient beings in endless ways, and finding that these beings firmly believe the ways that they are being taught in.

The third phrase corresponds to the Buddhist logic of “being, non-being, and in between.” This stage is the Seon of meaning and reason.

2) Master Baekpa’s Interpretation

Having delineated the three phrases and accepted them as the standard, Master Baekpa classifies Seon traditions. One of the char­acteristics of the Seon tradition is the system of transmission which the Buddha used with Mahakasyapa. This method is the mind-to-mind transmission at three different locations and it is this that is the theory of Extraordinary Seon.

But Master Baekpa thinks that the description of Extraordi­nary Seon consists of elements from the Seon of the Tathagata and the Seon of the patriarchs.

According to Master Baekpa, the first phrase corresponds to Vulture’s Peak, where the Buddha held up a flower and Mahakasyapa smiled, and it is the principle reason of Seon of the patri­archs. The second phrase falls under Stupa of Many Sons, where the Buddha sat with Mahakasyapa, and it is the principle of Seon of the Tathagata The last phrase corresponds to the Sala Tree Grove at Kusinara, where Mahakasyapa saw the Buddha’s feet, and it is the stage of both Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata.

This idea caused many arguments. But it was not only Master Baekpa who began the idea.

(1) New Influence and Original Duty

“New influence” means “practice newly.” It signifies ignorant new practice depending on the expedient means of the Buddha, for the practitioner’s faculty is low. Accordingly, practice only by new influence produces results which are bounded by “corrupt practice,” that is, practice which is the result of the dirt of habit.

“Original duty” signifies finding out how to be a Buddha through reflection, without separate cultivation, and to develop the true aspect of original duty. Therefore, one is bounded by the practice of dirty habit if there is only new influence, but can pos­sibly reach the original stage of Seon if one finds out one’s original duty by reflection. It is a state of abiding in original duty, and it is regarded by Master Baekpa as being included in the Seon of the Tathagata

Master Baekpa explains that when one reaches the stage of firm progress of one’s original duty, then it is possible to reach the Seon of the patriarchs. That is, when new influence exists along with the vitality of original duty to overcome old habits, this is the Seon of the Tathagata In addition, to achieve the key point in one’s Nature is Seon of the patriarchs. The Seon of meaning and reason is a state of only new influence without finding one’s origi­nal duty.

(2) Live Sword and Dead Sword

The expressions “live” and “dead” are one of the important family treasures of the Seon family. These expressions come from a Seon phrase accepted as one of the Linji tradition which is revealed in The Blue Cliff Records (Kor. Pyogam-nok). “Dead sword” sig­nifies the cutting of all defilements and erroneous thoughts with one sword and making all equal, and the “live sword” is to save all people with a sword that is kept in its scabbard.

Master Baekpa revealed that the “dead sword’ signifies the Seon of the Tathagata, and the “live sword” Seon of the patriarchs. And “to use both dead and live” is a stage of both the Seon of the Tathagata and the Seon of the patriarchs. He further stated that this view has continued right from the time of the Buddha up to the time of the Sixth Patriarch Master Huineng.

Master Baekpa also pointed out that Master Huineng transmit­ted the Seon of the patriarchs of the “live sword” to his disciple Master Nanyue Huairang, and the Seon of the Tathagata of the “dead sword” to Master Qingyuan Xingsi.

(3) Analysis of a Stanza of Diamond Sutra

Master Baekpa analyzes a stanza of four lines of Diamond Sutra as follows:

Those who by my form did see me,

And those who followed me by voice

Wrong the efforts they engaged in,

Me those people will not see.

“Those who by my form did see me corresponds to mystery in the function” of the three phrases of Seon of the Tathagata, and the phrase of “being” in the Seon of meaning and reason. “And those who followed me by voice” corresponds to “mystery in the essence” and the in between phrase. 3″ Wrong the efforts they engaged in” corresponds to “mystery in the mystery” and the phase of non-being. Last Me those people will not see” corresponds to the Seon of the Tathagata.

(4) The Analysis of the Four Vows

The Four Vows are the fountainhead of Mahayana Buddhism. The Four Vows are as follows:

I vow to save all beings.

I vow to end all sufferings.

I vow to learn all Dharma teachings.

I vow to attain Enlightenment.

Master Huineng has advised us to discover the Four Vows in our Self Nature. To that Master Baekpa gives the following analy­sis.

“I vow to save all beings” teaches us not to ponder the three poisons of our own mind. For this, Master Baekpa’s quotes the teaching of Master Huineng, “Do not think of good or evil.”

“I vow to end all sufferings” teaches us to cut off defilements by not, thinking of good.

“I vow to learn all Dharma teachings” teaches us that to vow to attain awakening is the greatest vow of learning.

“I vow to attain Enlightenment” teaches us to vow to at­tain Buddhahood. The way to vow is completed only when one from the stage of the true void reaches sublime existence.

(5) The Division of the Five Orders of Seon into Three Kinds of Seon

Insight of Man and Heaven and Essentials to Five Orders of Seon are books which generally focused on revealing the family tradi­tions of the Five Orders. However, many Seon families criticized this attitude. In order to see this problem clearly, the family tradi­tions of identification of the main traditions of general Seon need to be considered objectively. Especially Korean Seon students regard­ed this understanding of the Seon traditions of the Five Orders of Seon as one process in and a part of Seon study.

Master Baekpa used the division of the three categories of Seon in order to discriminate their relative superiority. This certainly caused a problem to the Buddhist world of the time and to later generations as well. Also Master Baekpa’s evaluation of other orders was totally based on his understanding of the attitude taught in Linji Seon, so it was not objective.

The Five Orders are Fayan Order (Kor. Beoban), Weiyang Order (Kor. Wiang), Caodong Order (Kor. Jodong), Yunmen Order (Kor. Unmun), and Linji Order (Kor. Imje). The first three are of the lineage of Master Qingyuan Xingsi, and they are consid­ered to belong to the Seon of the Tathagata. The last two are of the lineage of Master Nanyue Huairang, and they are classified as belonging to the Seon of the patriarchs. The Five Orders, according to Master Baekpa have different family tradition as follows:

1)Fayan Order reveals “Mind Only.”

2)Weiyang Order reveals “essence and function.”

3)Caodong Order reveals the way of elevation.

4)Yunmen Order reveals cutting.

5)Linji Order reveals the crux and function.

What is notable here is that the Heze Order (Kor. Hataek) or Southern Order of Master Heze Shenhui is omitted Master Baekpa thought that this order belongs to the Seon of meaning and reason, which is centered around mere logic. This order does not seek original duty but merely depends on new influence.

(6) The Core Point of Hand Glass of Seon Literature

To summarize the content of Hand Glass of Seon Literature, the book explains the three kinds of Seon on the basis of three phrases of Linji. Both Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata are regarded as the principle of Extraordinary Seon, but the Seon of meaning and reason falls under the limitation of logic. Accordingly, Seon of meaning and reason is nothing but a theory of expedients through study. Hence it is nothing but a view of Seon, which is not different from Kyo study.

C. The First Refutation of Hand Glass of Seon Literature:

Master Choui Uisun’s Four Defenses and Random Words

When Master Baekpa’s Hand Glass of Seon was introduced to the Buddhist world, Master Choui Uisun of Taedun-sa Monastery first criti­cized Master Baekpa in his Four Defenses and Random Words (Kor. Sabyeon-maneo).

In this book, Master Choui pointed out Master Baekpa’s fault of merely judging the superiority of the various types of Son according to language, saying, “Old masters said that Seon is Buddha Mind So when one achieves the mind, both teachings of masters and all worldly noises are the purport of Seon, and if one loses one’s mind, then both ‘The Buddha held up a flower and Mahakasyapa smiled’ and ‘a direct transmission outside the texts’ of Seon are merely traces of Kyo.”

(1) The Real Meaning of the “Three Phrases of Master Linji”

Master Baekpa reveals that the ranks of all of Son are, through the three phrases of Linji, divided into three different types of Son. And he provides, for the first phrase, the Son of the patriarchs, for the second phrase the Son of the Tathagata, and for the third phrase the Son of meaning and reason, and he proposes an argument on Son to substantiate his claim.

In answer to this, Master Ch’oui interprets the meaning of the three phrases from fundamentally different viewpoints. Unlike Mas­ter Baekpa who understood the three phrases separately, Master Ch’oui regarded the third phrase as a phrase in which the first and the second phrases join together. Hence, according to Master Ch’oui, the third phrase is valuable, and should not be regarded as a mere dead phrase which can be thrown away.

(2) The Origin of Seon of the Patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata

From where do the Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata originate? Master Baekpa finds the origin in a discussion between Master Yangshan Huiji and Master Xiangyan Zhixian, the disciples of Master Weishan Lingyou who is the fifth generation of Master Nanyue Huairang. Master Yangshan divided Seon of the pa­triarchs and Seon of the Tathagata and he valued the former high­ly.

But according to Master Choui, there is really no way to distinguish between the two. Unlike Master Baekpa’s position, Master Choui does not consider the two in a relationship of su­periority and inferiority.

(3) The Origin of Extraordinary Seon and Seon of Mean­ing and Reason

Master Choui points out that Master Baekpa commits an error of changing the traditional purport of Seon on his own authority without any proper reason. Master Choui indicates that Seon of the patriarchs is Extraordinary Seon, and Seon of the Tathagata is Seon of meaning and reason. Hence one can traditionally divide Seon into Ex­traordinary Seon and Seon of meaning and reason, and into Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata. This idea was already asserted by Master Hoam and Yeondam earlier to Master Choui.

Thereby, according to Master Choui, it is false to divide Seon into Seon of the patriarchs, Seon of the Tathagata, and Seon of meaning and reason, because the last two Seon fundamentally agree with each other. He claimed that one should not make the mistake of regarding the Seon of meaning and reason as inferior to Seon of the Tathagata,

D. The Second Refutation of Hand Glass of Seon Literature:

Master Udam Honggi’s Records of Right Awakening of Seon Family

Master Udam Honggi was the 10th generation after Master Buhyu, and the Dharma grandson of Master Baekpa because Mas­ter Udam was taught by Master Hanseong Pungmyeong, the disciple of Master Baekpa But Master Udam realized that Master Baekpa’s position was wrong and wrote Records of Right Awakening of Seon Family (Kor. Seonmun-jeungjeong-nok).

(1) About the Titles of Seon

Master Udam agreed with Master Baekpa’s opinion and both of them regarded the first and second phrases of Linji as Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata, respectively. But he, like Master Choui, claimed that Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata should be regarded as the reasoning of Extraordinary Seon and of Seon of meaning and reason, respectively.

(2) The Metaphor of Son: Live Sword and Dead Sword

Live and dead swords are one of basic traditional metaphors used in Seon. To kill with the sword means to kill the thief of ignorance, and to make alive in order to represent the Buddha of Dharma-body. But Master Udam pointed out that Master Baekpa applied “dead” and “live” to the Seon of the Tathagata and Seon of the patriarchs respectively and in this way he made the direction of the Seon tradition unclear.

Master Udam found these expressions used as standard descrip­tions in the records of Master Shitou and Master Mazu. In Records of Shitou, it is written that “It is not achieved by doing this or by not doing this. Hence it is a dead sword.” And in Records of Mazu, it is written, “It is achieved by doing this and by not doing this. Hence it is a live sword.”

Hence Master Udam thinks that if the phrase of Master Shitou “It is not achieved by doing this” belongs to the third phrase, then the phrase “or by not doing this” belongs to the first phrase. Therefore, the first phrase contains the dead sword. And in the case of Master Mazu, “It is achieved by doing this” belongs to the third phrase and “and by not doing this” belongs to the first phrase. Hence both the first and the third phrases are “live sword” and they can coexist.

Master Udam finally concludes that both dead and live phrases belong to the first phrase of Linji, and it was wrong of Master Baekpa to distinguish certain aspects as belonging to the Seon of the Tathagata or to the Seon of the patriarchs.

(3) The Beautiful Coloring of Seon

In the Diamond Sutra, it is revealed that “there is no fixed Dharma which is ‘the utmost, right and perfect enlightenment.'” Therefore, Master Udam thinks that the teachings of the Buddha and the patriarchs are not bound by anything, and it is the beauti­ful coloring of the Buddha and patriarchs, that they are free.

Master Udam considers that the coloring of the Buddha and patriarchs are divided into three; the substance, the function, and in between. And the original names for the three phrases of Linji consist of the substance, the function and in between. The mean­ings of these three essentials are arranged by meaning and reason which, because they are difficult to be revealed by mere words, are seen as three mysteries.

Meaning and reason vary according to the level of faculties of the people involved To people of high faculty, meaning and rea­son are revealed as essentials and called the first phrase of Linji. The second phrase of Linji reveals three mysteries as well as reflection on the first phrase. But the reflection (the second phrase) and the body (the first phrase) for Master Udam are inter­connected, and both of them are finally one.

E. The Defense of Hand Glass of Seon Literature:

Master Seoldu Yuhyong’s Origin of Son and the Course

Master Seoldu Yuhyong is the fourth generation after Master Baekpa. Master Seoldu claimed that the Seon views of Four Defenses and Random Words and Records of Right Awakening of the Seon Family are all wrong when one looks at the origin of Seon, and that a practitioner will finally come back to Master Baekpa’s position. Accordingly, Master Seoldu wrote Origin of Seon and the Course (Kor. Seonwon-soyu) with the aim of searching for the origin of Seon. As he reveals in the preface, he claims that one should search for the origin of Seon and return to the spirit. And when the origin is revealed, it will be seen that the origin is not the position of Master Choui, but the three kinds of Seon claimed by Master Baekpa.

1) The Three Kinds of Seon

Master Seoldu claims that it should be noted that there are two aspects to Seon: the “purport of Seon” and the “explanation of Seon.” The purport of Seon signifies the realization of the Buddha Mind through Seon. As Master Seosan expounded in Mirror of Seon, “If one gets lost in speech, even ‘holding up a flower and smiling’ is all just the reactions of Kyo.” It shows the “explanation of Seon.” But “On the other hand, if one realizes it within one’s own Mind, then all of the crass words and refined talk of the world become the Seon teaching of ‘a direct transmission outside the texts.’” This is the purport of Seon.

The above quotations of Master Seosan were also already used by Master Choui when he refuted Master Baekpa. But quoting the same content, Master Seoldu puts a different commentary to it, that one should not, in fact, cast aside the “explanation of Seon” at random. Because we are able to understand the writings with the help of the “explanation of Seon” and we have an opportunity to clearly understand through these writings. This claim is meaningful in the sense that Master Seoldu developed the idea of Master Baekpa further.

Anyway, what is regarded as the most important of the “explanation of Seon” for Master Seoldu is the three kinds of Seon; Seon of the Tathagata, Seon of the patriarchs, and Seon of meaning and reason. Master Seoldu defends Master Baekpa’s division of Seon into the three, saying that it is inevitable and the normal course of action to divide Seon and use it to explain and measure the facul­ties of sentient beings.

According to Master Seoldu, the logic that Seon of meaning and reason is not Extraordinary Seon is only right, hence it is also right that the Seon of meaning and reason is not regarded as equal to the Seon of the Tathagata or the Seon of the patriarchs. In this sense, it is right to divide Seon into these three kinds.

2) The Theory of “Transmission of the Mind in Three Places”

Master Baekpa interpreted the theory of transmission of the mind at three places as follows.

1)The First Place: The Buddha was giving a Dharma talk to the masses in the heaven and in the world at the Stupa of Many Sons when Mahakasyapa appeared. Then the Buddha sat with Mahakasyapa. This sitting is expressed as dead sword, for it is a place where no trace of Dharma is found.

2)The Second Place: The Buddha was giving a Dharma talk at Vultures’ Peak, when the rain of many flowers fell from the sky. The Buddha held up a flower and only Mahakasyapa smiled. It is the principle of live sword, for the holding up of a flower is the Buddha’s live Dharma speech to Mahakasyapa.

3)The Third Place: The Buddha was in Final Nirvana at the Sala Tree Grove at Kusinara, when Mahakasyapa arrived seven days after the Buddha’s passing away. Mahakasyapa tapped the coffin three times and the Buddha stuck out his two feet and Mahakasyapa vowed three times. It is Seon purport which shows the Buddha’s bestowing of both live and dead forms.

Master Seoldu explains that generations of patriarchs who received transmission of the mind at the three places did not distinguish between the “dead” or “live” sword. But it is after the Sixth Patriarch Huineng that the swords were divided and transmitted separately, for the faculties became varied. Hence the transmission was divided into “dead,” “live,” and “in between.”

F. The Last Refutation of Hand Glass of Seon Literature:

Master Chugwon Jinha’s Records of Reawakening of Seon Family

Master Chugwon Jinha was the last one who joined the argument over Seon. He learned the texts from masters Baekpa and Seoldu, but he developed his own logic of Seon, in which he criti­cizes the two masters in his Records of Reawakening of Seon Family (Kor. Seonmun-chaejeung-nok). He believed that the Seon thought of masters Choui and Udam was correct and that their arguments were right.

The master lived at a time in which national prestige was at a very low level because of annexation of the country to Japan. To Master Chugwon, the issue of the Seon argument could fall into the category of a leisurely discourse which was not right for the time. Hence it seems that he tried to reveal the problem of this argument on Seon in the sense of adjusting and arranging it rather than adding to and criticizing the problem. His position was simply to reveal the Seon position of masters Choui and Udam again as a form of conclusion.

1) The Problem of the Three Phrases and the Three Seon

Traditionally, masters have been used to the words of the Seon of the Tathagata and Seon of the patriarchs on the one hand, and Seon of meaning and reason and Extraordinary Seon on the other. But it is only Master Baekpa who put the first two Seon together and regarded them as Extraordinary Seon, looking down on the Seon of meaning and reason. Besides, Master Baekpa gave the wrong explanation about the three phrases of Linji because he arranged them wrongly and it seems wrong to contend for the superiority or the inferiority of the three Seon.

Master Chugwon pointed out that the titles Seon of the patri­archs and Seon of the Tathagata themselves are not correct. The very concept of Seon of the Tathagata being the teacher of humans and those in the heaven, and Seon of the patriarchs being for the Buddhas and the patriarchs seems wrong.

Master Chugwon emphasized that the superiority of Seon can­not be distinguished by revealing it, whether it is Seon of the patri­archs or Seon of the Tathagata, and Extraordinary Seon or Seon of meaning and reason. There must only be a difference whether the Seon is in a live phrase or in a dead phrase, and one cannot differentiate Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata.

2) The Problem of Seon of Meaning and Reason

In Seon, the expression “direct transmission outside the texts” is often used. Master Chugwon thought that Master Baekpa regarded “outside the texts” the same as the “extraordinary” of “Extraordi­nary Seon.” But Master Chugwon considered Master Seoldu’s “out­side the texts and “extraordinary” the same from one point of view and different from another. According to Master Chugwon, Master Seoldu considered both Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata to be “outside the texts” and “extraordinary.”

Here, Master Chugwon thought that though the Seon of mean­ing and reason are not “extraordinary,” it should be regarded as “outside the texts.” The Seon of meaning and reason is, in the strictest sense, “a direct transmission outside the texts.”

What matters here is whether Seon is free from every trace of Kyo or not. When the road to reason is cut off, there opens a road to the “extraordinary.” Hence the way left for the Seon of meaning and reason is to cut the meaning and reason.

3) The Problem of “Live and Dead”

“Dead sword” and, “live sword” mean “sitting with Mahakasyapa” and “holding up a flower” respectively. Masters Baekpa and Seoldu explained that “sitting with Mahakasyapa” signifies the Seon of the Tathagata, and “holding up a flower” signifies the Seon of the patriarchs. Master Chugwon, here criticizes that “dead” and “live” should be in the same family, and they must not be separated from each other.

G. Conclusion

1) The Starting Point of the Seon Argument

The argument on Seon in the late Joseon Dynasty was started by Master Baekpa Geungseon of Seonun-sa Monastery. Master Baekpa’s idea of dividing Seon into three kinds created a dispute in the Korean Buddhist world which lasted through the 18th and 19th centuries. This argument can be criticized because it stirred up a problem of a pointless argument which was nothing but a desk theory. But it is certainly significant in the sense that the argument made the issue of searching for our Original Nature to be the Seon logic of the general Buddhist world.

Therefore, it is right to value the argument as a process of stretching for Korean Buddhist thinking before its modernization. The material on the basis of which the argument was begun was The Essence and the Songs of Seon (Kor. Seonmun-yeomsong) writ­ten in 1226 by Goryeo National Teacher Jingak Hyeshim. This book includes 1,125 hwadus and it is they that became the basis for reaching the way to awakening. On the basis of this book, there were various movements according to the different periods of time to search for simpler, better and newer methods for practicing the way.

The time of Master Baekpa was not exceptional. Master Baekpa wished to discriminate and show the superiority of Seon in order to reveal its true stages. To this end he wrote Hand Glass of Seon literature to arrange the basic texts of Seon which were most often used by students. The texts are: Master Chiso’s Insight of Man and Heaven, Master Hwanseong Jian’s Essentials of Five Orders of Seon, Master Cheonchaek’s Precious Storehouse of Seon, and Essentials of of Seon.

2) The Application of Seon of the Patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata

Master Baekpa established three ways of reaching the final stage of Seon of the patriarchs. He identified three kinds of facul­ties, that is, high, middle, and low faculties with the first, second, and third phrases of Linji respectively. In addition he regarded the characteristics of these three phrases to be expressed as Seon of the patriarchs, Seon of the Tathagata, and Seon of meaning and reason.

What is very particular here is that Master Baekpa put Seon of the patriarchs in a higher place than Seon of the Tathagata. But this position caused a fundamental problem in that everyone won­dered how the Tathagata, that is, Sakyamuni Buddha, can be con­sidered inferior to the patriarchs.

This position that Seon of the patriarchs is superior to Seon of the Tathagata has several meanings in Seon. Firstly, Seon sees that which has been transmitted by the patriarchs as superior to the stage which the Tathagata attained Secondly, the stages of true void and sublime existence should be realized together in Seon, and the former is the stage of Seon of the Tathagata, and the latter is of Seon of the patriarchs. Thirdly, the principles of the Seon of the patriarchs and of the Seon of the Tathagata are divided and explained separately in texts. Fourthly, the Flower Garland study also distinguishes the Seon of the patriarchs from the Seon of the Tathagata.

3) The Problem of Seon Argument of Master Baekpa’s Lineage

Master Baekpa gave the explanation that Linji and Yunmen orders belong to the Seon of the patriarchs, and that Caodong, Weiyang, and Fayan orders belong to the Seon of the Tathagata, and Heze Order to Seon of meaning and reason. But these distinc­tions were very troublesome. Each of the Seon orders had its own family tradition, and it is not right to try to evaluate the superior­ity or inferiority of the different orders. Hence it is natural that Master Baekpa’s idea was severely criticized.

In this sense, lay scholar Chusa Kim Jeong-hui criticized Master Baekpa saying that “The truth of Seon is like a light new dress without stitching, just like a heavenly dress. But the dress is patched and repatched by the inventiveness of humans, and so be­comes a worn-out piece of clothing.” Chusa thought that one can only reveal the traditions of the Seon orders, but to discriminate between their relative superiority and inferiority is like fighting for food which has been begged for by a beggar. To discriminate between the Five Orders of Seon is to destroy the real meaning of Seon.

4) The Problem of Seon Argument of Master Choui’s Lineage

As Master Baekpa made a mistake, masters Choui and Udam also committed an error. They claimed that Seon should be divided into Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata on the one hand, and into Extraordinary Seon and Seon of meaning and reason on the other. Then, it should be accepted by the masters that the Seon of meaning and reason and Seon of the Tathagata of the three phrases of Linji are the same. But they thought that the third phrase contains both Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata, and then it is not clear whether Seon of the Tathagata and Seon of meaning and reason fundamentally agree or not. If the source of Seon is nothing but the overcoming of opponents, then it only creates a misunderstanding of the true quality of Seon.

In this sense, any of the positions of Master Baekpa or those of Master Choui are not something for us to agree with. But in the process of searching for solutions to the problems created by this argument, we can develop an important and significant way to realizing the essence of Seon. Hence, the masters were pioneers who cultivated the way to understanding the purport of Seon. It was a new development in a new direction of Seon on a new stage through a new way of practice, just when the Korean nation faced a period of extreme hardship, and it is for this reason that the argument was so important in the Korean Buddhist world.

A representative Seon master of the late Joseon Dynasty, Seon Master Choui became known as the “Korean Tea Sage” for reviving Korea’s traditional tea ceremony. In addition, owing to his remarkable skill in poetry, calligraphy and painting, from the Buddhist perspective he is judged highly as both an artist and a man of letters, erudite in all aspects of the culture of his age.

Career

The late Joseon era society of Master Choui’s age, founded on the world view of Song Confucianism, had devolved to the squabbling of power politics and the correctives offered by the appearance of “practical knowledge” (silhak) were losing their power. In addition, with the second wave of nationwide suppression against the burgeoning religion of Catholicism having inflamed the public sentiment, the king’s power was also in decline, bringing about a state of affairs that could not easily be rectified. Buddhism as well barely survived, lacking any energy for vital reform or self-strengthening, owing to the Joseon Dynasty’s policy of sungyu eokbul, “revere Confucianism, suppress Buddhism.” It was during such times that one monk showed exceptional skill in both his writing and actions, excelling even among those traditional scholars imbued with the wide-spread bigotry of arrogance and contempt that most held toward monks at that time. This monk was none other Master Choui Uisun.

Master Choui was born April 5, 1786, in Samhyang-myeon, Muan-gun, Jeolla-do Province. At the age of four, he fell into some water and was on the verge of drowning before a monk rescued him, thus forging his intimate connection with Buddhism. At the age of 14, he was tonsured under Master Byeokbong Minseong at Unheungsa Temple in Nampyeong. At Daeheungsa Temple in Haenam, he studied the Tripitaka (Buddhist Scriptures) and at 20 he concluded his studies of the monastic curriculum.

In 1801, Dasan Jeong Yakyong, the consummate scholar of the “practical knowledge” (silhak)school of late Joseon and exceptionally erudite author of a compendium exceeding 500 volumes on the fields of chemistry, history, politics, military affairs, economics and others, was exiled to Gangjin in Jeolla-do Province, accused of being a leading figure in the Catholic Church. Master Choui’s life and thought were deeply influenced by Dasan. Through his relationship with Dasan, he learned Confucianism and matured in his prose and poetry, developing a close friendship in the process. Even after his thirties, Master Choui exchanged intellectual discussion and friendship with a wide range of the highest Confucian intellects of his age, men who had participated directly in the cultural and political history of late Joseon. One of his closest friends was Chusa Kim Jeonghui (1786~1856), scion of a prominent traditional Confucian family, and pioneer of the imported Qing culture, based primarily on the fields of epigraphy and textual study. Upon Chusa’s banishment to Jejudo Island, Master Choui even went so far as to visit him five times to offer him consolation. Coming into his forties, as his own fame began to spread, Master Choui returned Daeheungsa Monastery in Mt. Duryunsan, where he built the Iljiam Hermitage on a valley on the east side of the Monastery. There, he spent roughly forty years writing and practicing samatha/vipassana (jigwan) meditation until on August 2, 1866, at the age of 80, he passed into nirvana.

Writings

The life works handed down by Master Choui are by no means scarce in quantity. Beginning in 1830, when the Master was 44, he wrote the Dasinjeon (Tales of the Tea Spirit), a work based on the original text of the “Chajing Caiyao,” a selection about tea taken from the Chinese classic, the Wanbao Quanshu. In 1837, at the age of 51, at the request of Haegeodoin Hong Hyeonju, he wrote the Dongdasong (Ode to the Tea of the East), referred to as Korea’s “Tea Chronicles,” a composition of poetry about the history and excellence of Korean tea. Though only the preface written by Yeoncheon Hong Seokju (1774~1842) and Jaha Shin Wi (1769~1847) remains extant, we can infer that at 65, he compiled the Choui Sijip (The Collected Poems of Choui) a collection of the poetry he had written while on break from meditation and engaging in cultural exchanges with high government officials.

There are also many other surviving works written by Master Choui, whose time of composition is unknown. These works include the representative critique, the Sunmun Sabyeon Maneo; the Choui Seongwa (Choui’s Seon Teachings), a gloss on the main points of Hyesim’s Seonmun Yeomsong;the Jinmuk Josa Yujeokgo (A Biography of Master Jinmuk); and others. After the Master’s death, a compilation of his prose works, the Iljiam Munjip (Collected Works from Iljiam), came out in 1890, and a two-volume collection of his poetry, called the Choui Sigo (Anthology of Poems by Master Choui), was published in 1906.

Doctrinal Distinction

Master Choui’s ideas can largely be separated between his ideas on Seon and his ideas on “the way of tea.” To begin with, we can examine his Seon thought through his Seonmun Sabyeon Man-eo, written as a critique of the Seonmun Sugyeong, a work written by his contemporary, Seon Master Baekpa (1767~1852), addressing practice methods and theories based on the capacities of practitioners. Master Baekpa’s argument, based on his estimation of the respective merits of Seon, divides the “three categories of Seon” in a hierarchy of patriarchal Seon (Josa Seon), tathāgata Seon (Yeorae Seon), and theoretical Seon (Uiri Seon), and classifies patriarchal Seon and tathāgata Seon as “extraordinary Seon” (Gyeogoe Seon). It is this categorization itself that Master Choui refutes as fundamentally incorrect. He argued his difference of opinion with Master Baekpa, that there should be four categories of Seon—patriarchal Seon and tathāgata Seon, extraordinary Seon and theoretical Seon. The controversy regarding the different approaches to meditation that began in the late 1700s with Master Choui’s critique of Master Baekpa’s Seonmun Sugyeong would rage for almost a century.

Though the differences between their fundamental viewpoints were quite distinct, both of them shared a common goal to both sincerely clarify and offer solutions to the problems faced by the Buddhist community. They offered significant contributions in arousing an atmosphere committed to clarifying the core tenets of the sect and rediscovering the “Seon spirit.” Having developed this type of Seon theory, in being neither partial only to Seon meditation or doctrinal study (Gyo), Master Choui’s practice of samatha/vipassana meditation (jigwan) reveals the distinguishing characteristic of his Seon thought. This fact is expressed in the following passage taken from Shin Heon’s Choui Daejongsa Tapbimyeong (Stone Pagoda Engravings about the Lineage Master Choui):

The other day, a monk asked me, “Master, are you solely devoted to the practice of Seon?” to which I replied, “As there in no difference whether I devoted myself only to Seon or to studying the scriptures, why would I insist upon only Seon? For those who devote themselves only to the scriptures, it is very difficult not to forget the principles of the teaching, those who insist upon only practicing Seon, it is difficult to acquire the principles of Seon.”

In this way, Master Choui advocated the practice of jigwan together with a combination of doctrinal study and Seon, more than a devotion solely to the practice of Seon.

We can observe Master Choui’s other main line of thought in his view on the way of tea,as expressed in the Dongdasong. As it was cast in the form of a Buddhist song (gesong, or gatha) that praised the tea (da) produced in Korea, which the Chinese referred to as Dongguk (Nation of the East), this work was called the Dongdasong, or Ode to the Tea of the East. With few references to the proper methods for preparing tea or the proper implements used therein, Master Choui reveals his intention to avoid the formalistic complexities of the tea ceremony. His “way of tea” was an ordinary routine of life that involved lighting a fire, boiling some water and then drinking the properly prepared combination of well-steeped water and quality tea. He noted also that the nature of tea was inherently unselfish and impartial to desires, and he said that this nature was something likened to a “pure original source.”

Master Choui stated that it was in this way that tea possessed a sublime and exquisite essence, and if one did not become attached to that essence, one could arrive at a perfectly free state of transcendent perfection (Sanskrit: pāramitā). Accordingly, he stated, “Since you drink of tea’s undefiled spirit and energy, the day of great enlightenment can’t be far off.’”

In addition, Master Choui said that tea and Seon are not two separate things and that in drinking a cup of tea, one must experience the “meditative bliss of experiencing the joy of the dharma” (beophui seonyeol). Such words reveal the thought in the dictum, “the one exquisite flavor of tea and Seon” (daseon ilmi). Like this, Master Choui’s “way of tea” stands as a testament to his image as a sincere truth seeker, enjoying his Seon practice while simultaneously engaged in asceticism. We can say that this Seon master’s modern attitude, one that does not separate but rather seeks to connect the world of enlightenment and the world of our daily life, shown to us by a Seon monk, is a Buddhist response to the modern thought that was being led by the Confucian school of silhak. Moreover, it could also be said that his Buddhist practice was a means by which the Buddhism that had previously been cast to the mountains and kept a distance from the mundane world, could creep just a little closer to the masses.

Ever since Seon was introduced to Korea, there was a drive to prove the superiority of Seon over Kyo throughout the Korean Buddhist world, especially in the late Goryeo Dynasty.

After the seventh century CE, when Seon had taken root in China and was well established, various disputes arose within the Seon School. These arguments began with the difference of opinion between Master Huineng of Southern Seon and Master Shenxiu of Northern Seon. Then the conflict between the Mahayana Seon claimed by the Northern Order and Seon of the Tathagata (Kor. Yeorae Seon) of the Southern Order became prominent in the Seon world. That is, Master Heze Shenhui claimed that the Seon of the Tathagata is superior to Mahayana Seon, and the former is named so, for it is equal to the Tathagata.

But the newly established Hongzhou Order of Master Mazu’s lineage criticized Master Shenhui, calling him a master of mere intellectual understanding, one who searches for meaning and rea­son. And the Hongzhou Order developed an independent Seon pur­port, which investigates the Dharma transmitted by Master Bodhidharma This is the Seon of the patriarchs (Kor. Josa Seon), and this Seon was claimed as being superior to and surpassing the Seon of the Tathagata.

This claim is based on the idea that Seon is superior to Kyo. The realization of Seon as being “a direct transmission, outside the texts, not relying on words and letters, direct transmission from mind to mind, seeing into one’s nature and attaining Buddhahood” is not achieved through texts but through a transmission from mind to mind. Here, the awakening of the Tathagata is the center in the Seon of the Tathagata, but what is more important is the Seon purport of the patriarchs in the Seon of the patriarchs. This pur­port of Seon later even influenced academic lecturers who studied Kyo, so that these Kyo scholars who did not have any Seon prac­tice emphasized the superiority of Seon.

In Korea, the main dispute was started by scholarly monks who lived in the southern and southwestern areas of the peninsula of Korea. They published personal records on various theories of Buddhism in 18th century and from this the disputes arose in the Seon families during the reigns of King Jeongjo (r. 1777-1800), King Soonjo (r. 1801-1834), King Heonjong (r. 1835-1849), King Cheoljong (r. 1850-1863) and King Gojong (r. 1864-1907).

The leading roles were taken by Master Baekpa Geungseon (1767-1852), Master Choui Uiseon (1786-1856), lay scholar Chusa (1786-1856), Master Udam Honggi (1822-1881), Master Seoldu Yuhyeong (1822-1881), Master Chugwon Jinha (1861-1926) and lay scholar Jeong Dasan (1762-1836), each one partic­ipating more or less directly. Beginning with Master Baekpa’s Hand Glass of Seon Literature (Kor. Seonmun-sugyong), the monks took up and started arguing about Seon. Let us investigate the main point of their argument.

Master Baekpa wrote Hand Glass of Seon Literature in order to lay out a standard by which to discriminate the relative superi­ority of the various forms of Seon. The book considers three phrases of Master Linji’s teaching as the standard, depending foe its source mainly on Records of Linji. In addition there are other ref­erences such as Master Chiso’s Insight of Man and Heaven (Kor. Incheon-anmok), Master Hwanseong Jian’s Essentials of Five Or­ders of Seon (Kor. Seonmun-ojong-kangyo), Master Cheonchaek’s Precious Storehouse of Seon (Kor. Seonmun-bojang-nok), and Essentials of Seon (Kor. Seonmun-kangyo).

Before we examine whether the Seon thesis revealed in Hand Glass of Seon is a correct way of looking at things or not, it is important to first understand the general idea of the book.

The book reveals that all Seon can be originally discriminated into three kinds, that is, Seon of the patriarchs, Seon of the Tathagata, and Seon of meaning and reason (Kor. Uiri Seon), a theory derived from the Seon teachings of the three phrases of Linji. Mas­ter Baekpa evaluates and analyses the phrases, coming to the con­clusion that the first phrase is the Seon of the patriarchs, the sec­ond phrase is the Seon of the Tathagata, and the third is the Seon of meaning and reason.

1) The “Three Phrases of Master Linji” is the Standard of Seon

Master Baekpa goes on to argue that this correct view of the three phrases solves all problems of searching for standards of Seon. The first phrase is the phrase before host and guest are divided and it is achieved when a practitioner has insight into the true void and sublime existence. Such a practitioner has a high faculty, and becomes a master of Buddhas and patriarchs, when attaining the first phrase. It is a stage of Seon of the patriarchs.

The second phrase is such in which confrontation is ceased and which removes any clue of argument. It is to reach the “three mysterious gates” of Linji, and they are the mystery in the word, the mystery in the function, and the mystery in the mystery. The first signifies the essence of language, the second the final use of language, the third the place where no language is to be found. The third phrase started from theory, but there is no language found in the end, hence the final mystery is analyzed by Master Baekpa to be that of the true stage.

The background of the true stage of the mystery is a place of truth where there is no foolishness. The three mysteries show that the way of Son starts from language and reaches the stage which cannot be expressed by language.

The third phrase is bound by form and conception. It signifies dealing with expedient means. To borrow the expression of Re­cords of Linji, it is “giving speech to arahats when they meet arahats, and to hungry ghosts when they meet hungry ghosts.” This describes the stage of teaching sentient beings in endless ways, and finding that these beings firmly believe the ways that they are being taught in.

The third phrase corresponds to the Buddhist logic of “being, non-being, and in between.” This stage is the Seon of meaning and reason.

2) Master Baekpa’s Interpretation

Having delineated the three phrases and accepted them as the standard, Master Baekpa classifies Seon traditions. One of the char­acteristics of the Seon tradition is the system of transmission which the Buddha used with Mahakasyapa. This method is the mind-to-mind transmission at three different locations and it is this that is the theory of Extraordinary Seon.

But Master Baekpa thinks that the description of Extraordi­nary Seon consists of elements from the Seon of the Tathagata and the Seon of the patriarchs.

According to Master Baekpa, the first phrase corresponds to Vulture’s Peak, where the Buddha held up a flower and Mahakasyapa smiled, and it is the principle reason of Seon of the patri­archs. The second phrase falls under Stupa of Many Sons, where the Buddha sat with Mahakasyapa, and it is the principle of Seon of the Tathagata The last phrase corresponds to the Sala Tree Grove at Kusinara, where Mahakasyapa saw the Buddha’s feet, and it is the stage of both Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata.

This idea caused many arguments. But it was not only Master Baekpa who began the idea.

(1) New Influence and Original Duty

“New influence” means “practice newly.” It signifies ignorant new practice depending on the expedient means of the Buddha, for the practitioner’s faculty is low. Accordingly, practice only by new influence produces results which are bounded by “corrupt practice,” that is, practice which is the result of the dirt of habit.

“Original duty” signifies finding out how to be a Buddha through reflection, without separate cultivation, and to develop the true aspect of original duty. Therefore, one is bounded by the practice of dirty habit if there is only new influence, but can pos­sibly reach the original stage of Seon if one finds out one’s original duty by reflection. It is a state of abiding in original duty, and it is regarded by Master Baekpa as being included in the Seon of the Tathagata

Master Baekpa explains that when one reaches the stage of firm progress of one’s original duty, then it is possible to reach the Seon of the patriarchs. That is, when new influence exists along with the vitality of original duty to overcome old habits, this is the Seon of the Tathagata In addition, to achieve the key point in one’s Nature is Seon of the patriarchs. The Seon of meaning and reason is a state of only new influence without finding one’s origi­nal duty.

(2) Live Sword and Dead Sword

The expressions “live” and “dead” are one of the important family treasures of the Seon family. These expressions come from a Seon phrase accepted as one of the Linji tradition which is revealed in The Blue Cliff Records (Kor. Pyogam-nok). “Dead sword” sig­nifies the cutting of all defilements and erroneous thoughts with one sword and making all equal, and the “live sword” is to save all people with a sword that is kept in its scabbard.

Master Baekpa revealed that the “dead sword’ signifies the Seon of the Tathagata, and the “live sword” Seon of the patriarchs. And “to use both dead and live” is a stage of both the Seon of the Tathagata and the Seon of the patriarchs. He further stated that this view has continued right from the time of the Buddha up to the time of the Sixth Patriarch Master Huineng.

Master Baekpa also pointed out that Master Huineng transmit­ted the Seon of the patriarchs of the “live sword” to his disciple Master Nanyue Huairang, and the Seon of the Tathagata of the “dead sword” to Master Qingyuan Xingsi.

(3) Analysis of a Stanza of Diamond Sutra

Master Baekpa analyzes a stanza of four lines of Diamond Sutra as follows:

Those who by my form did see me,

And those who followed me by voice

Wrong the efforts they engaged in,

Me those people will not see.

“Those who by my form did see me corresponds to mystery in the function” of the three phrases of Seon of the Tathagata, and the phrase of “being” in the Seon of meaning and reason. “And those who followed me by voice” corresponds to “mystery in the essence” and the in between phrase. 3″ Wrong the efforts they engaged in” corresponds to “mystery in the mystery” and the phase of non-being. Last Me those people will not see” corresponds to the Seon of the Tathagata.

(4) The Analysis of the Four Vows

The Four Vows are the fountainhead of Mahayana Buddhism. The Four Vows are as follows:

I vow to save all beings.

I vow to end all sufferings.

I vow to learn all Dharma teachings.

I vow to attain Enlightenment.

Master Huineng has advised us to discover the Four Vows in our Self Nature. To that Master Baekpa gives the following analy­sis.

“I vow to save all beings” teaches us not to ponder the three poisons of our own mind. For this, Master Baekpa’s quotes the teaching of Master Huineng, “Do not think of good or evil.”

“I vow to end all sufferings” teaches us to cut off defilements by not, thinking of good.

“I vow to learn all Dharma teachings” teaches us that to vow to attain awakening is the greatest vow of learning.

“I vow to attain Enlightenment” teaches us to vow to at­tain Buddhahood. The way to vow is completed only when one from the stage of the true void reaches sublime existence.

(5) The Division of the Five Orders of Seon into Three Kinds of Seon

Insight of Man and Heaven and Essentials to Five Orders of Seon are books which generally focused on revealing the family tradi­tions of the Five Orders. However, many Seon families criticized this attitude. In order to see this problem clearly, the family tradi­tions of identification of the main traditions of general Seon need to be considered objectively. Especially Korean Seon students regard­ed this understanding of the Seon traditions of the Five Orders of Seon as one process in and a part of Seon study.

Master Baekpa used the division of the three categories of Seon in order to discriminate their relative superiority. This certainly caused a problem to the Buddhist world of the time and to later generations as well. Also Master Baekpa’s evaluation of other orders was totally based on his understanding of the attitude taught in Linji Seon, so it was not objective.

The Five Orders are Fayan Order (Kor. Beoban), Weiyang Order (Kor. Wiang), Caodong Order (Kor. Jodong), Yunmen Order (Kor. Unmun), and Linji Order (Kor. Imje). The first three are of the lineage of Master Qingyuan Xingsi, and they are consid­ered to belong to the Seon of the Tathagata. The last two are of the lineage of Master Nanyue Huairang, and they are classified as belonging to the Seon of the patriarchs. The Five Orders, according to Master Baekpa have different family tradition as follows:

1)Fayan Order reveals “Mind Only.”

2)Weiyang Order reveals “essence and function.”

3)Caodong Order reveals the way of elevation.

4)Yunmen Order reveals cutting.

5)Linji Order reveals the crux and function.

What is notable here is that the Heze Order (Kor. Hataek) or Southern Order of Master Heze Shenhui is omitted Master Baekpa thought that this order belongs to the Seon of meaning and reason, which is centered around mere logic. This order does not seek original duty but merely depends on new influence.

(6) The Core Point of Hand Glass of Seon Literature

To summarize the content of Hand Glass of Seon Literature, the book explains the three kinds of Seon on the basis of three phrases of Linji. Both Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata are regarded as the principle of Extraordinary Seon, but the Seon of meaning and reason falls under the limitation of logic. Accordingly, Seon of meaning and reason is nothing but a theory of expedients through study. Hence it is nothing but a view of Seon, which is not different from Kyo study.

C. The First Refutation of Hand Glass of Seon Literature:

Master Choui Uisun’s Four Defenses and Random Words

When Master Baekpa’s Hand Glass of Seon was introduced to the Buddhist world, Master Choui Uisun of Taedun-sa Monastery first criti­cized Master Baekpa in his Four Defenses and Random Words (Kor. Sabyeon-maneo).

In this book, Master Choui pointed out Master Baekpa’s fault of merely judging the superiority of the various types of Son according to language, saying, “Old masters said that Seon is Buddha Mind So when one achieves the mind, both teachings of masters and all worldly noises are the purport of Seon, and if one loses one’s mind, then both ‘The Buddha held up a flower and Mahakasyapa smiled’ and ‘a direct transmission outside the texts’ of Seon are merely traces of Kyo.”

(1) The Real Meaning of the “Three Phrases of Master Linji”

Master Baekpa reveals that the ranks of all of Son are, through the three phrases of Linji, divided into three different types of Son. And he provides, for the first phrase, the Son of the patriarchs, for the second phrase the Son of the Tathagata, and for the third phrase the Son of meaning and reason, and he proposes an argument on Son to substantiate his claim.

In answer to this, Master Ch’oui interprets the meaning of the three phrases from fundamentally different viewpoints. Unlike Mas­ter Baekpa who understood the three phrases separately, Master Ch’oui regarded the third phrase as a phrase in which the first and the second phrases join together. Hence, according to Master Ch’oui, the third phrase is valuable, and should not be regarded as a mere dead phrase which can be thrown away.

(2) The Origin of Seon of the Patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata

From where do the Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata originate? Master Baekpa finds the origin in a discussion between Master Yangshan Huiji and Master Xiangyan Zhixian, the disciples of Master Weishan Lingyou who is the fifth generation of Master Nanyue Huairang. Master Yangshan divided Seon of the pa­triarchs and Seon of the Tathagata and he valued the former high­ly.

But according to Master Choui, there is really no way to distinguish between the two. Unlike Master Baekpa’s position, Master Choui does not consider the two in a relationship of su­periority and inferiority.

(3) The Origin of Extraordinary Seon and Seon of Mean­ing and Reason

Master Choui points out that Master Baekpa commits an error of changing the traditional purport of Seon on his own authority without any proper reason. Master Choui indicates that Seon of the patriarchs is Extraordinary Seon, and Seon of the Tathagata is Seon of meaning and reason. Hence one can traditionally divide Seon into Ex­traordinary Seon and Seon of meaning and reason, and into Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata. This idea was already asserted by Master Hoam and Yeondam earlier to Master Choui.

Thereby, according to Master Choui, it is false to divide Seon into Seon of the patriarchs, Seon of the Tathagata, and Seon of meaning and reason, because the last two Seon fundamentally agree with each other. He claimed that one should not make the mistake of regarding the Seon of meaning and reason as inferior to Seon of the Tathagata,

D. The Second Refutation of Hand Glass of Seon Literature:

Master Udam Honggi’s Records of Right Awakening of Seon Family

Master Udam Honggi was the 10th generation after Master Buhyu, and the Dharma grandson of Master Baekpa because Mas­ter Udam was taught by Master Hanseong Pungmyeong, the disciple of Master Baekpa But Master Udam realized that Master Baekpa’s position was wrong and wrote Records of Right Awakening of Seon Family (Kor. Seonmun-jeungjeong-nok).

(1) About the Titles of Seon

Master Udam agreed with Master Baekpa’s opinion and both of them regarded the first and second phrases of Linji as Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata, respectively. But he, like Master Choui, claimed that Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata should be regarded as the reasoning of Extraordinary Seon and of Seon of meaning and reason, respectively.

(2) The Metaphor of Son: Live Sword and Dead Sword

Live and dead swords are one of basic traditional metaphors used in Seon. To kill with the sword means to kill the thief of ignorance, and to make alive in order to represent the Buddha of Dharma-body. But Master Udam pointed out that Master Baekpa applied “dead” and “live” to the Seon of the Tathagata and Seon of the patriarchs respectively and in this way he made the direction of the Seon tradition unclear.

Master Udam found these expressions used as standard descrip­tions in the records of Master Shitou and Master Mazu. In Records of Shitou, it is written that “It is not achieved by doing this or by not doing this. Hence it is a dead sword.” And in Records of Mazu, it is written, “It is achieved by doing this and by not doing this. Hence it is a live sword.”

Hence Master Udam thinks that if the phrase of Master Shitou “It is not achieved by doing this” belongs to the third phrase, then the phrase “or by not doing this” belongs to the first phrase. Therefore, the first phrase contains the dead sword. And in the case of Master Mazu, “It is achieved by doing this” belongs to the third phrase and “and by not doing this” belongs to the first phrase. Hence both the first and the third phrases are “live sword” and they can coexist.

Master Udam finally concludes that both dead and live phrases belong to the first phrase of Linji, and it was wrong of Master Baekpa to distinguish certain aspects as belonging to the Seon of the Tathagata or to the Seon of the patriarchs.

(3) The Beautiful Coloring of Seon

In the Diamond Sutra, it is revealed that “there is no fixed Dharma which is ‘the utmost, right and perfect enlightenment.'” Therefore, Master Udam thinks that the teachings of the Buddha and the patriarchs are not bound by anything, and it is the beauti­ful coloring of the Buddha and patriarchs, that they are free.

Master Udam considers that the coloring of the Buddha and patriarchs are divided into three; the substance, the function, and in between. And the original names for the three phrases of Linji consist of the substance, the function and in between. The mean­ings of these three essentials are arranged by meaning and reason which, because they are difficult to be revealed by mere words, are seen as three mysteries.

Meaning and reason vary according to the level of faculties of the people involved To people of high faculty, meaning and rea­son are revealed as essentials and called the first phrase of Linji. The second phrase of Linji reveals three mysteries as well as reflection on the first phrase. But the reflection (the second phrase) and the body (the first phrase) for Master Udam are inter­connected, and both of them are finally one.

E. The Defense of Hand Glass of Seon Literature:

Master Seoldu Yuhyong’s Origin of Son and the Course

Master Seoldu Yuhyong is the fourth generation after Master Baekpa. Master Seoldu claimed that the Seon views of Four Defenses and Random Words and Records of Right Awakening of the Seon Family are all wrong when one looks at the origin of Seon, and that a practitioner will finally come back to Master Baekpa’s position. Accordingly, Master Seoldu wrote Origin of Seon and the Course (Kor. Seonwon-soyu) with the aim of searching for the origin of Seon. As he reveals in the preface, he claims that one should search for the origin of Seon and return to the spirit. And when the origin is revealed, it will be seen that the origin is not the position of Master Choui, but the three kinds of Seon claimed by Master Baekpa.

1) The Three Kinds of Seon

Master Seoldu claims that it should be noted that there are two aspects to Seon: the “purport of Seon” and the “explanation of Seon.” The purport of Seon signifies the realization of the Buddha Mind through Seon. As Master Seosan expounded in Mirror of Seon, “If one gets lost in speech, even ‘holding up a flower and smiling’ is all just the reactions of Kyo.” It shows the “explanation of Seon.” But “On the other hand, if one realizes it within one’s own Mind, then all of the crass words and refined talk of the world become the Seon teaching of ‘a direct transmission outside the texts.’” This is the purport of Seon.

The above quotations of Master Seosan were also already used by Master Choui when he refuted Master Baekpa. But quoting the same content, Master Seoldu puts a different commentary to it, that one should not, in fact, cast aside the “explanation of Seon” at random. Because we are able to understand the writings with the help of the “explanation of Seon” and we have an opportunity to clearly understand through these writings. This claim is meaningful in the sense that Master Seoldu developed the idea of Master Baekpa further.

Anyway, what is regarded as the most important of the “explanation of Seon” for Master Seoldu is the three kinds of Seon; Seon of the Tathagata, Seon of the patriarchs, and Seon of meaning and reason. Master Seoldu defends Master Baekpa’s division of Seon into the three, saying that it is inevitable and the normal course of action to divide Seon and use it to explain and measure the facul­ties of sentient beings.

According to Master Seoldu, the logic that Seon of meaning and reason is not Extraordinary Seon is only right, hence it is also right that the Seon of meaning and reason is not regarded as equal to the Seon of the Tathagata or the Seon of the patriarchs. In this sense, it is right to divide Seon into these three kinds.

2) The Theory of “Transmission of the Mind in Three Places”

Master Baekpa interpreted the theory of transmission of the mind at three places as follows.

1)The First Place: The Buddha was giving a Dharma talk to the masses in the heaven and in the world at the Stupa of Many Sons when Mahakasyapa appeared. Then the Buddha sat with Mahakasyapa. This sitting is expressed as dead sword, for it is a place where no trace of Dharma is found.

2)The Second Place: The Buddha was giving a Dharma talk at Vultures’ Peak, when the rain of many flowers fell from the sky. The Buddha held up a flower and only Mahakasyapa smiled. It is the principle of live sword, for the holding up of a flower is the Buddha’s live Dharma speech to Mahakasyapa.

3)The Third Place: The Buddha was in Final Nirvana at the Sala Tree Grove at Kusinara, when Mahakasyapa arrived seven days after the Buddha’s passing away. Mahakasyapa tapped the coffin three times and the Buddha stuck out his two feet and Mahakasyapa vowed three times. It is Seon purport which shows the Buddha’s bestowing of both live and dead forms.

Master Seoldu explains that generations of patriarchs who received transmission of the mind at the three places did not distinguish between the “dead” or “live” sword. But it is after the Sixth Patriarch Huineng that the swords were divided and transmitted separately, for the faculties became varied. Hence the transmission was divided into “dead,” “live,” and “in between.”

F. The Last Refutation of Hand Glass of Seon Literature:

Master Chugwon Jinha’s Records of Reawakening of Seon Family

Master Chugwon Jinha was the last one who joined the argument over Seon. He learned the texts from masters Baekpa and Seoldu, but he developed his own logic of Seon, in which he criti­cizes the two masters in his Records of Reawakening of Seon Family (Kor. Seonmun-chaejeung-nok). He believed that the Seon thought of masters Choui and Udam was correct and that their arguments were right.

The master lived at a time in which national prestige was at a very low level because of annexation of the country to Japan. To Master Chugwon, the issue of the Seon argument could fall into the category of a leisurely discourse which was not right for the time. Hence it seems that he tried to reveal the problem of this argument on Seon in the sense of adjusting and arranging it rather than adding to and criticizing the problem. His position was simply to reveal the Seon position of masters Choui and Udam again as a form of conclusion.

1) The Problem of the Three Phrases and the Three Seon

Traditionally, masters have been used to the words of the Seon of the Tathagata and Seon of the patriarchs on the one hand, and Seon of meaning and reason and Extraordinary Seon on the other. But it is only Master Baekpa who put the first two Seon together and regarded them as Extraordinary Seon, looking down on the Seon of meaning and reason. Besides, Master Baekpa gave the wrong explanation about the three phrases of Linji because he arranged them wrongly and it seems wrong to contend for the superiority or the inferiority of the three Seon.

Master Chugwon pointed out that the titles Seon of the patri­archs and Seon of the Tathagata themselves are not correct. The very concept of Seon of the Tathagata being the teacher of humans and those in the heaven, and Seon of the patriarchs being for the Buddhas and the patriarchs seems wrong.

Master Chugwon emphasized that the superiority of Seon can­not be distinguished by revealing it, whether it is Seon of the patri­archs or Seon of the Tathagata, and Extraordinary Seon or Seon of meaning and reason. There must only be a difference whether the Seon is in a live phrase or in a dead phrase, and one cannot differentiate Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata.

2) The Problem of Seon of Meaning and Reason

In Seon, the expression “direct transmission outside the texts” is often used. Master Chugwon thought that Master Baekpa regarded “outside the texts” the same as the “extraordinary” of “Extraordi­nary Seon.” But Master Chugwon considered Master Seoldu’s “out­side the texts and “extraordinary” the same from one point of view and different from another. According to Master Chugwon, Master Seoldu considered both Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata to be “outside the texts” and “extraordinary.”

Here, Master Chugwon thought that though the Seon of mean­ing and reason are not “extraordinary,” it should be regarded as “outside the texts.” The Seon of meaning and reason is, in the strictest sense, “a direct transmission outside the texts.”

What matters here is whether Seon is free from every trace of Kyo or not. When the road to reason is cut off, there opens a road to the “extraordinary.” Hence the way left for the Seon of meaning and reason is to cut the meaning and reason.

3) The Problem of “Live and Dead”

“Dead sword” and, “live sword” mean “sitting with Mahakasyapa” and “holding up a flower” respectively. Masters Baekpa and Seoldu explained that “sitting with Mahakasyapa” signifies the Seon of the Tathagata, and “holding up a flower” signifies the Seon of the patriarchs. Master Chugwon, here criticizes that “dead” and “live” should be in the same family, and they must not be separated from each other.

G. Conclusion

1) The Starting Point of the Seon Argument

The argument on Seon in the late Joseon Dynasty was started by Master Baekpa Geungseon of Seonun-sa Monastery. Master Baekpa’s idea of dividing Seon into three kinds created a dispute in the Korean Buddhist world which lasted through the 18th and 19th centuries. This argument can be criticized because it stirred up a problem of a pointless argument which was nothing but a desk theory. But it is certainly significant in the sense that the argument made the issue of searching for our Original Nature to be the Seon logic of the general Buddhist world.

Therefore, it is right to value the argument as a process of stretching for Korean Buddhist thinking before its modernization. The material on the basis of which the argument was begun was The Essence and the Songs of Seon (Kor. Seonmun-yeomsong) writ­ten in 1226 by Goryeo National Teacher Jingak Hyeshim. This book includes 1,125 hwadus and it is they that became the basis for reaching the way to awakening. On the basis of this book, there were various movements according to the different periods of time to search for simpler, better and newer methods for practicing the way.

The time of Master Baekpa was not exceptional. Master Baekpa wished to discriminate and show the superiority of Seon in order to reveal its true stages. To this end he wrote Hand Glass of Seon literature to arrange the basic texts of Seon which were most often used by students. The texts are: Master Chiso’s Insight of Man and Heaven, Master Hwanseong Jian’s Essentials of Five Orders of Seon, Master Cheonchaek’s Precious Storehouse of Seon, and Essentials of of Seon.

2) The Application of Seon of the Patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata

Master Baekpa established three ways of reaching the final stage of Seon of the patriarchs. He identified three kinds of facul­ties, that is, high, middle, and low faculties with the first, second, and third phrases of Linji respectively. In addition he regarded the characteristics of these three phrases to be expressed as Seon of the patriarchs, Seon of the Tathagata, and Seon of meaning and reason.

What is very particular here is that Master Baekpa put Seon of the patriarchs in a higher place than Seon of the Tathagata. But this position caused a fundamental problem in that everyone won­dered how the Tathagata, that is, Sakyamuni Buddha, can be con­sidered inferior to the patriarchs.

This position that Seon of the patriarchs is superior to Seon of the Tathagata has several meanings in Seon. Firstly, Seon sees that which has been transmitted by the patriarchs as superior to the stage which the Tathagata attained Secondly, the stages of true void and sublime existence should be realized together in Seon, and the former is the stage of Seon of the Tathagata, and the latter is of Seon of the patriarchs. Thirdly, the principles of the Seon of the patriarchs and of the Seon of the Tathagata are divided and explained separately in texts. Fourthly, the Flower Garland study also distinguishes the Seon of the patriarchs from the Seon of the Tathagata.

3) The Problem of Seon Argument of Master Baekpa’s Lineage

Master Baekpa gave the explanation that Linji and Yunmen orders belong to the Seon of the patriarchs, and that Caodong, Weiyang, and Fayan orders belong to the Seon of the Tathagata, and Heze Order to Seon of meaning and reason. But these distinc­tions were very troublesome. Each of the Seon orders had its own family tradition, and it is not right to try to evaluate the superior­ity or inferiority of the different orders. Hence it is natural that Master Baekpa’s idea was severely criticized.

In this sense, lay scholar Chusa Kim Jeong-hui criticized Master Baekpa saying that “The truth of Seon is like a light new dress without stitching, just like a heavenly dress. But the dress is patched and repatched by the inventiveness of humans, and so be­comes a worn-out piece of clothing.” Chusa thought that one can only reveal the traditions of the Seon orders, but to discriminate between their relative superiority and inferiority is like fighting for food which has been begged for by a beggar. To discriminate between the Five Orders of Seon is to destroy the real meaning of Seon.

4) The Problem of Seon Argument of Master Choui’s Lineage

As Master Baekpa made a mistake, masters Choui and Udam also committed an error. They claimed that Seon should be divided into Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata on the one hand, and into Extraordinary Seon and Seon of meaning and reason on the other. Then, it should be accepted by the masters that the Seon of meaning and reason and Seon of the Tathagata of the three phrases of Linji are the same. But they thought that the third phrase contains both Seon of the patriarchs and Seon of the Tathagata, and then it is not clear whether Seon of the Tathagata and Seon of meaning and reason fundamentally agree or not. If the source of Seon is nothing but the overcoming of opponents, then it only creates a misunderstanding of the true quality of Seon.

In this sense, any of the positions of Master Baekpa or those of Master Choui are not something for us to agree with. But in the process of searching for solutions to the problems created by this argument, we can develop an important and significant way to realizing the essence of Seon. Hence, the masters were pioneers who cultivated the way to understanding the purport of Seon. It was a new development in a new direction of Seon on a new stage through a new way of practice, just when the Korean nation faced a period of extreme hardship, and it is for this reason that the argument was so important in the Korean Buddhist world.

Master Baekpa was one of Korea’s the greatest meditation Masters who embodied the essence of Buddhist discipline as well as Hwaeom philosophy. He had a great argument in Seon tradition with the Seon Master Choui (1786-1866) in the late Joseon period.

1. Biography

The foundation of the Joseon Dynasty based on the Theory of Human Nature reached its limit at the beginning of the late Joseon period (18th century). The solution to the deadlock came in the form of Neo-Confucianism which was a system which continued to be monopolized by the aristocratic classes and even greatly influenced the Buddhist community, sometimes directly and sometimes indirectly. Master Baekpa was the great Buddhist leader who lived at that time.

Master Baekpa was born in 1767 at Mujang-hyeon in Jeolla-do province; when he was 11 years old he left for Seoneunsa Temple to become a monk. The main teachings of Seon were transmitted to him by Venerable Seolpa Sangeon at Yeongwonam Hermitage and then he went to Guamsa Temple on Mt. Yeonggusan and succeeded the Seon lineage of Master Seolbong. After years of intense practice, he began to teach and delivered dharma talks to his students for 20 years after that. Whenever he taught, several hundred monks would gather to listen to him from all over the country.

In 1815, when he was 48 years old, he regretted the way of practice that he had followed up until then. He said, “Since becoming a monk at a young age I have studied continuously. Yet, I only counted on other’s treasures and so do not have any of my own – not even half.” So then he went up into the mountains and practiced while wandering from temple to temple. His companions were like-minded practitioners who had all made the same resolution which was that they would practice Seon until they died. So together they made “The Retreat Community of Meditation and Wisdom”; the master was 55 years old at that time. After that, he taught meditation practice at Unmunsa Temple in Chungcheong-do and became well known as a great Seon master in Jeolla-do province. In 1826 he wrote a book, Seonmun sugyeong, which explained the methods and the theories of Seon practice and it was this book which started one of the greatest philosophical arguments of that time.

He returned to Guamsa Temple in 1830 at the age of 63 and continued to deliver Seon lectures and guide his students; from the age of 73 on, he stayed at Hwaeomsa Temple, and there he died in 1852 at the age of 85.

When he passed way, the great neo-Confucian scholar, Chusa Kim Jeonghui (1786-1856 C.E.), wrote an epitaph “Hwaeom jongju Baekpa daeyulsa daegi daeyong jibi” which means “The tomb of the founder of the Hwaeom School, Great Precept Master Baekpa.” In this way Chusa praised Master Baekpa calling him a master of Seon as well as of doctrine – a great compliment.

All of his writings are related to Seon as the core of his philosophy was concerned with Seon. As he was considered to be the founder of the Hwaeom Order by Chusa Kim Jeonghui, it is presumed the teachings of Hwaeom were equally important to him.

From his dharma lineage, the doctrines of Hwaeom and of Seon practice were accepted together and this then became one of the characteristics of the Seon tradition of the Joseon period. He defined Seon and the doctrine as follows:

“The doctrine consists of dead words, while Seon is alive. The nature of the mind is pure at its origin; it is illusion that is empty. As you awaken, the mind is the Buddha and so you practice with this mind: this is the ultimate Seon. And so practicing and cultivating yourself continuously, you will attain samadhi.”

Here, it is emphasized that Seon is better than mere doctrine; this view point is clearly stated in his book Seonmun sugyeong (Hand Mirrors of Seon Practice). The book explains the methods and theories in a very logical way by passing through 23 items which are categorized according to the ability of the practitioners. He opined that, though all practitioners do the same practice, the results are not the same. That is, the ability of practice depends on the individual and, keeping in mind this fact, the true Seon state of samadhi can be reached. His aim in classifying the procedure of practice and its results was to recognize the ability of the individual and so to find ways of overcoming the limitations of each one.

The book, Seonmun sugyeong, divides Seon into three different types: Patriarch Seon (Josaseon), Tathagatha Seon (Yeoraeseon), and Rational Seon (Uriseon in Korean). He wrote about meditation and divided it up into three different categories. There were Josaseon, the first phase, Yeoraeseon the second phase, and Uriseon, the third phase. Josaseon, the highest, is a state of enlightenment of true emptiness and indescribable beingness, so that the usual mind is comprehended as being nothing but the Buddha Mind. Yeoraeseon, the second level, is also a state in which everything is gathered together and so there is only concern with the One Mind. In the state of Yeoraeseon, there is the conviction of the existence of Mind Only. The third kind of Seon, Uiriseon, the lowest one, in which there is discrimination of phenomena and essence, existence and emptiness, in which reason is present, is not a state of Mind Only; Uriseon is merely spoken Seon.

He differentiated the “Five Houses” of the Seon School, after the sixth patriarch, Huineng, by the Three Seons. The reason he identified three types of Seon was to set up, once again, the right Seon tradition. In this way he created a classification for establishing the correct tradition once and for all. As the title of the book indicates, Seonmun sugyeong is a book for Seon practitioners to keep constantly with them just like a handy mirror for checking our appearance.

As soon as his book was published, there was a very strong reaction. One of the greatest masters of that time, Master Choui, argued against Master Baekpa in a book called Seonmun sabyeon maneo. He was not alone as several other recognized masters who were all influenced by new-Confucianism criticized the book severely. Seonmun sugyeong became the source of intensive philosophical debates at that time which failed to reach an outcome due to the strong opinions on all sides. Though Seonmun sugyeong began with a simple personal opinion, it is evaluated as a major motif for the developmental history of Seon. Thus the analysis of the approach to the nature of enlightenment, through the understanding of Seon, contributed to the development of Korean Buddhism.

The Master Cheongheo Hyujeong’s ordination name was Cheongheo, his postumous name, Seosan, and his dharma name, Hyujeong.

Career

The master was born in Anju, Pyeongan-do Province. Called Unhak at a child, he lost his parents at an early age, then followed a friend of his father to Seoul where he entered Joseon’s highest educational institution, the Seonggyungwan. At 14, though Unhak’s brilliance set him apart from others, he was despondent facing the reality of being unable to easily secure a government position, having failed his official exams and lacking any foundation within an established household. With these feelings of frustration towards his reality, Unhak and some friends decided to go on an excursion to a place where they could find the sagacious wisdom of great monks, Mt. Jirisan. In the process, he came upon someone who led his way to a new life, Master Sungin, in a tiny hermitage near Sinheungsa Monastery.

Master Sungin, who recommended the cultivation of the Buddha dharma, was questioned by Unhak, “How does the mind arise? To what in the mind does one enlighten to?” Master Sungin spoke. “The mind is not an object that can be expressed through words. Having neither appearance, color, size, nor weight, the mind belongs to a world that is impossible to access through our processes of recognition and therefore it demands that each of us experience it on our own, such that we can be able to recognize it. He then spoke of the Buddhist scriptures, stating that “If you carefully read and think deeply, bit by bit you can enter into the gate of the mind.”

A genius well acquainted to the principle texts of Confucianism, Unhak quickly flew through the Tripitaka, the Buddhist Canon. In here he didn’t find the ethical values of filial piety, ritual, five relationships, benevolence, and virtue as represented in the Confucian classics; in the Tripitaka, he found concepts like mind, nothingness, the world of truth, facts, the law of cause and effect, impermanence, without attributes, without self, and the like, complicated philosophies and systems of thought. Unhak’s mind was shaken, as if he had taken a blow to the head from a small metal rod. “In the midst of eternity, humanity exists within the instant of each moment. Within this boundless universe, humanity is nothing more than a single speck of dust. And here I swagger as if I know it all, acting impudently.” The friends who had accompanied Unhak on this journey returned to Seoul but Unhak remained, taking on Sungin as his teacher, beginning his life as a supplicant, and vigorously studying the scriptures. He learned seon from Master Buyong, who had become enlightened solely through the practice of Seon meditation without engaging in formal doctrinal study. Though Unhak had obtained liberation of wisdom (jihye haetal) through his sagely understanding of the meaning of ‘mind,’ ‘no attributes,’ and ’emptiness,’ he had still not attained liberation of the mind (sim haetal). Therefore, he remained bound and attached to matter and appearances, unable to act freely, with his mind frustrated. The more he exerted himself trying to escape his attachments to these empty names and false appearances, the more entangled he became. It was in this state that one night he suddenly heard the cries of a cuckoo and from his meditative state (samadhi), he awakened to a world of sublime truths, totally indescribable through words or text, a beautiful Buddha world that appeared to the eye as if a mountainside of blooming spring flowers. Unhak thus finally shaved his head, and with his ordination, was born again.

At the age of 32, Master Hyujeong placed the top of his class on the examination of the monastic curriculum, and he ascended to the highest position in the Buddhist order, the master arbiter of both the order of Seon and doctrinal study (Gyo). However, thinking it wasn’t a monk’s part to take administrative office within the sangha, he resigned his post, returning to Mt. Geumgangsan where he gave his undivided attention to his practice and guiding the younger monks, while at the same time producing important writings revealing his Seon thought.

In 1592 (the 25th year of Seonjo’s reign), when Master Hyujeong was 72 years old and living on Mt. Myohyangsan, Joseon, the Land of Morning Calm, was invaded by the Japanese in the year of Imjin. He recalled the reality where Buddhism had faced only heaps of scorn and contempt owing to the violent policy of Buddhist suppression promulgated by the Confucian scholars of the Joseon court. Nevertheless, Hyujeong felt that though the nation had renounced Buddhism, Buddhism could never reject the nation, as the nation was where countless sentient beings needed saving through great compassion. Thus, he ultimately took to the battlefield. Even at his advanced age of 72, on his own accord he took command of a monk militia, and together with troops from the Ming Dynasty, he recaptured Pyeongyang and fought to the bitter end, until the war met its completion with the consummation of a peace treaty with Japan.

After leading his troops to military victory, Hyujeong bequeathed all of his military authority to his disciples and then headed back to the mountains where he devoted himself entirely to the cultivation of his practice. In January, 1604, with snow piled high around Wonjeogam Hermitage, Hyujeong concluded his sermon on the hwadu that had filled his entire life, the ‘mind’ hwadu, brought out his portrait, wrote the following lines as a final transmission to his disciples, and then assumed the lotus position, entering into nirvana. His worldly age was 84, and his age in the sangha (beomnap), 67.

80 years ago, that thing was me

80 years later, and now aren’t I that thing!

Hyujeong left behind over 1000 disciples and among them, there are at least seventy outstanding figures. Among these, four disciples in particular, Samyeong Yujeong (1544~1610), Pyeonyang Eongi (1581~1644), Soyo Taeneung (1562~1649), and Jeonggwan Ilseon (1533~1608), stand out as the most representative, as they were the leaders of the four main groups within the community of Hyujeong’s disciples.

Writings

Master Hyujeong’s written output includes a four volume, two book set of his collected works, Cheongheodangjip (collected works of Ven. Cheongheo), as well as the Seongyogyeol (Essence of Seon and Gyo), Simbeop yocho (Summary of the Mind Dharma), Seongyoseok (Interpretations of Seon and Gyo), Unsudan [a book of Buddhist rituals], Samga gwigam (Reflections on the Three Religions, i.e. Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism), Seolseon ui (Manners of Lecturing on Seon Meditiation) and the Jesandan Uimun, among others.

Intellectual Distinction

Hyujeong used the ‘mind’ as the object of his lifelong hwadu. The topic of Hyujeong’s many books, including the Samga gwigam, Seongyoseok, Seongyogyeol, and others, is ‘mind.’

In the Samga gwigam, he represented “mind” in terms of it being “a single thing” (ilmul). His view was that mind alone was the mother of the universe, that it was the foundation of humanity, heaven and earth. He noted how it was within the mind that the division of good and evil, along with all ideologies and assertions began, and that it was in that mind that the Buddha and all sentient beings began as well.

Starting from the main premise that “Seon is the Buddha’s mind, Gyo (doctrinal study) is the Buddha’s word,” Hyujeong advanced the idea that with Seonas principal and Gyo as subordinate, one could proceed to enlightenment, and thus he placed Seon superior to Gyo. Seon is the arrival at the wordless truth, accomplished through silence, without a word. Gyo is the arrival to the wordless world, accomplished through edification in the scriptures. Therefore, he noted that Gyo is a method that, following the teachings of the Buddha, examines every dharma, and teaches the principles of emptiness. Seon is entering directly into this principle of emptiness and experiencing it, and Patriarchal Seon, in particular, cuts into the space where meaning takes place, forming the principle of emptiness in the mind’s foundation.

In terms of practice, Master Hyujeong especially advocated Ganhwaseon. Ganhwaseon is one of the methods used in the Seon practice of investigating hwadu. A hwadu is a highly original and powerfully emblematic word problem created by the awakened Patriarchs to guide their disciples on the path to awakening, namely, a hwadu is “a mass of doubt.” Investigation here means thinking about the hwadu while practing Seon mediation. Accordingly, he said that if one investigates their hwadu with the sincerity that a thirsty person thinks about water, the mind would be awakened. However, stressing that Seon meditation practiced in a foolish mind would bring no benefit and only aggravate more foolishness, he argued that cultivation without an awakened mind was not true cultivation. Here he was inheriting Master Bojo Jinul’s dictum of seono husu (first, awakening, then cultivation), particularly the idea of dono jeomsu, “sudden awakening followed by gradual practice,” in speaking of the cultivation that is founded upon awakening.

Moreover, he warned that no matter how diligently one practices Seon, without precepts,only evil wisdom could be created, and though monks and nuns may focus on the practice of Seon meditation in order to achieve enlightenment, it was critical for them to work together in maintaining our mind’s fundamental precepts, those that help each of us guard against the temptations of one’s environment, as well as those that help us collectively purify our thoughts, words and deeds.

He also addressed yeombul, the practice of changing the Buddha’s name, and said that chanting was a practice that made it easier for your mind not to forget, but be mindful of the Pure Land of Amita Buddha. He defined yeombul as using the synchronization of mouth and mind, through the sincere and focused practice of calling out the Buddha’s name while keeping mindfulness on the Pure Land, clearly and without any confusion. He said that although foolish people engage in yeombul to be reborn in the Pure Land, to learned people it would do nothing but cleanse their own minds.

In these ways, Hyujeong displays the distinct mark of his thought. It begins with a sense of doubt about the mind, and then uses that mind to harmonize various methods of ascetic practice.

This business of enlightenment does not depend on whether you are lay or ordained, a novice or experienced, nor is dependent on the influence or the practice of the many past lives. Sudden awakening only lies within the one clear faith of the practitioner’s thought. This is why the Buddha also said, “Faith, as the root of one’s fundamental being and the mother of virtue, brings about the development of the good dharma of the fundamental unity. Faith brings about the development of wisdom’s virtue and faith infallibly brings one to the arrival in the seat of Vairocana.”

Whether presiding over domestic matters, directing public affairs at the ministry, having guests over to share some conversation, eating and having some tea, going out, standing, sitting or lying down, in the end, by all means please ask yourself, “What is all of this?” If you simply ask yourself this question ceaselessly, meditating on the truth without rest, before you know it you’ll find yourself laughing uproariously. Thereupon you’ll come to know for the first time that it is not necessary to shave your head, wear the robes, leave home, practice asceticism or sit on a cushion like a monk in order to have such an experience of awakening.

A letter written to Her Excellency Princess Sungnyeong
If you want to want to accomplish the one great thing, it makes no difference whether you reside amongst the ordained or not, among men or women, beginning or senior students. Everything lies within your final sincere singular thought. What I see that is different in the princess’s innate disposition compared to others is that from the beginning, there has never been selfishness or suspicion or a deluded mind, there has been nothing other than an entirely sincere mind searching for the complete and unsurpassed supreme enlightenment of Buddhahood. Isn’t it as if you’ve been permeated with the correct dharma of wisdom through a close association with Seon knowledge from some countless eons ago in the past? As the ancients say, “A grown man is not someone who pays attention to a woman’s figure, a grown man is someone who is endowed with the four dharmas.” These four dharmas are: one, an acquaintance with the knowledge of Seon; two, hearing the correct teachings; three, thinking about the meaning of those teachings; and four, acting in accordance with those teachings. If you are imbued with these four dharmas, it can truly be said that you are fully grown, if not, though you may have the body of an adult, it cannot be said that you are fully grown.

I pray, my princess, that you believe this teaching beyond a shadow of a doubt and that you ceaselessly focus on your hwadu everyday, twenty four hours a day, in all four of the bodies postures, whether walking, standing, sitting or lying down. If you concentrate without stopping, never resting, and question your hwadu whether in the midst of tranquility or noisiness, even if you are not trying to concentrate, you will naturally concentrate. When speaking or being silent, even if you are not questioning your hwadu, you naturally question. Awake or asleep, your hwadu appears before you and though you may want to forget it, you do not; though you may want to awake from it, you will not awaken. In this mental state, unwittingly the body is overturned and abandoned. It is here where a woman’s body changes into a man’s, a man’s body changes and becomes a Buddha. This is my most ardent and sincere request of you.Ten Points on Seon Practice
1. When ordinary people see a visual form or hear a sound, they are unable to escape it. What shall you do to be able to escape the world of form and sound?
2. If you have already escaped the realm of sound and form, you must immediately begin studying. What is the proper way to practice?
3. If you have already begun your practice, you then need to ripen your practice, but how?
4. If your practice has ripened, you must then rid yourself of all traces. How can these traces be eliminated?
5. If all traces have been removed, you become cold and aloof, with no appetite and absolutely no vigor. Your consciousness connects with nothing, your mind not active, in this state you are like a phantom, not knowing the ways of the human world. When you’ve gotten to this point, what is the boundary between human and phantom?
6. When your practice becomes extremely intense, you become perfectly still, unvarying whether asleep or awake. Though struck, you are not perturbed; though moved, your focus is not lost. Like when a dog sees a kettle of boiling oil, though they may have an urge to lick it, they cannot, in the same way, though we may want to quit our study, we seemingly cannot. At that point, what are you going to have to do?
7. Suddenly, it seems as if a two-hundred pound weight is brought down on you, instantly crushing and breaking you. At that point, what is your self-nature?
8. If you have already awakened to your own self-nature, you must know the correct way to utilize the original function of your self-nature, in accordance with your karma. What is the correct way to utilize the original function of your self-nature?
9. If you already know the function of your self-nature, you must be freed from life and death. When your sight fails you and your body withers, how will you free yourself?
10. If you are already free from life and death, you must know where you are going. When the four elements (earth, water, fire and wind) become dispersed, where do they go?Mosquito
Without knowing you were born a weakling
You drink too much blood and can’t take to the sky
By all means, don’t covet other people’s precious things
Later on, you’ll certainly have to repay in fullAdmonishing the People
Because you were busy wandering through the mundane world
You didn’t realize you were growing old and gray
Wealth and fame is like a gate of misfortune engulfed in blazes
From time immemorial, how many have perished in its flames?Buddha’s Birthday
Even though the newborn took seven steps, it was still a mistake
But pointing to the earth and sky was even worse
Were it not for those mistakes then
He might have been spared the pain of Yumen’s cudgelA Vow
I wish, in every place that I am reborn
No matter where I am, I never retreat from the wisdom of the dharma
Like Shakyamuni, with dauntless cognition
Like Vairocana, with profound attainment of enlightenment
Like Manjusri, with great wisdom
Like Samantabhadra, with extensive practice
Like Ksitigarbha, with a limitless body
Like Guanyin, through thirty different manifestations
In the worlds of the ten directions, may I emanate in every place, without exception
Leading all sentient beings to the state of the unconditioned
Let those who hear my name be freed from the three hells
Those who see my form attain enlightenment
In this way, I will continue enlightening the world, unto eternity
Until finally, there comes to be neither Buddhas nor sentient beings
I pray to the heavenly dragons and eight types of dharma protectors
In order to protect me, do not part from me
No matter what difficulty arises, please clear the way
And help bring about the realization of this profound vow